Volume 133, Issue 1 e13491
Original Article

Rapid laboratory diagnosis of urinary tract infection, with or without antibiotic decision support–a small pilot study investigating accuracy and clinical impact

Einar Nilsen

Corresponding Author

Einar Nilsen

Department of Microbiology, Møre and Romsdal Health Trust, Alesund, Norway

Einar Nilsen, Department of Microbiology, Møre and Romsdal Health Trust, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Parkvegen 84, 6407 Molde, Trondheim, Norway.

e-mail: [email protected]

Search for more papers by this author
Kristine Karlsrud Berg

Kristine Karlsrud Berg

Microbiology Department, Sørlandet Hospital, Kristiansand, Norway

Search for more papers by this author
Fabian Åhrberg

Fabian Åhrberg

Department of Microbiology, Møre and Romsdal Health Trust, Alesund, Norway

Search for more papers by this author
Eivor Johanne Nordstrand Jacobsen

Eivor Johanne Nordstrand Jacobsen

Department of Microbiology, Møre and Romsdal Health Trust, Alesund, Norway

Search for more papers by this author
Kasper Kavli Øvstehus

Kasper Kavli Øvstehus

Department of Paediatrics, University Hospital of North Norway, Tromso, Norway

Search for more papers by this author
Erik Otte

Erik Otte

Microbiology Department, Canterbury Health Laboratories, Christchurch, New Zealand

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 04 November 2024

Abstract

The study evaluated the accuracy and clinical impact of rapid diagnostics (RD) with or without antibiotic decision support (ADS) for hospitalized patients with urinary tract infections. A two-centre prospective intervention was conducted with 230 patients divided into three groups: RD-only (n = 59), RD plus ADS (n = 56) and a control group (n = 115). Mean laboratory turnaround time for RD was 10 h and 50 min. Of 115 microorganisms, 108 were correctly identified. The error rate for rapid susceptibility determination was 0.85%. Total antibiotic consumption, measured in defined daily doses (DDD), was lower in the intervention groups compared to the control group (ADS: 10.3 DDD, p = 0.01; RD: 10.9 DDD, p = 0.06; control: 13.0 DDD). No significant differences were observed in the use of broad-spectrum antibiotics (p = 0.816). Adherence to antibiotic guidelines was significantly better in the ADS group compared to the control group (p = 0.015) (RD vs control; p = 0.261). The ADS group also received fewer doses of ineffective antibiotics (ADS: 1.8 doses, p = 0.012; RD: 2.4 doses, p = 0.195; control: 3.4 doses). Length of hospital and ICU stays or 30-day readmission rates did not differ across groups. No in-hospital mortality was observed in any group.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT

The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.

DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

The datasets generated and analysed during the current study are not publicly available, because of regulations and data safety concerning research data and patient confidentiality. A redacted/anonymised dataset is available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.