Validity of calendar day-based definitions for community-onset bloodstream infections

BMC Research Notes

Deirdre L Church¹  Daniel B Gregson¹  Kevin B Laupland² 

[1] Division of Microbiology, Calgary Laboratory Services, #9, 3535 Research Road NW, Calgary T2A 2K8, AB, Canada;Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada

关键词: Epidemiology;    Incidence;    Community-acquired;    Bacteremia;    Nosocomial;   

Others  :  1164304
DOI  :  10.1186/s13104-015-1051-x

 received in 2014-12-17, accepted in 2015-03-11,  发布年份 2015

【 摘 要 】

Background

Community-onset (CO) bloodstream infections (BSI) are those BSI where the blood culture is drawn <48 hours from hospital admission. However, exact times of culture draw or hospital admission are not always available. We evaluated the validity of using 2- or 3- calendar day based definitions for CO-BSI by comparing to a “gold standard” 48-hour definition.

Findings

Among the population-based cohort of 14,106 episodes of BSI studied, 10,543 were classified as CO based on “gold standard” 48-hour criteria. When 2-day and 3-day definitions were applied, 10,396 and 10,707 CO-BSI episodes were ascertained, respectively. All but 147 (1.4%) true CO-BSI cases were included by using the 2-day definition. When the 3-day definition was applied, all cases of CO-BSI were identified but and additional 164 (1.5%) cases of hospital-onset HO-BSI were also included. Thus the sensitivity and specificity of the 2-day definition was 98.6% and 100% and for the 3-day definition was 100% and 98.5%, respectively. Overall, only 311 (2.2%) cases were potentially miss-classifiable using either the 2- or 3-calendar day based definitions.

Conclusions

Use of either a 2- or 3-day definition is highly accurate for classifying CO-BSI.

【 授权许可】

   
2015 Laupland et al.; licensee BioMed Central.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Laupland KB, Church DL: Population-Based Epidemiology and Microbiology of Community-Onset Bloodstream Infections. Clin Microbiol Rev 2014, 27(4):647-664.
• [2]Friedman ND, Kaye KS, Stout JE, McGarry SA, Trivette SL, Briggs JP, et al.: Health care–associated bloodstream infections in adults: a reason to change the accepted definition of community-acquired infections. Ann Intern Med 2002, 137(10):791-797.
• [3]Morin CA, Hadler JL: Population-based incidence and characteristics of community-onset Staphylococcus aureus infections with bacteremia in 4 metropolitan Connecticut areas, 1998. J Infect Dis 2001, 184(8):1029-1034.
• [4]Laupland KB: Defining the epidemiology of bloodstream infections: the 'gold standard' of population-based assessment. Epidemiol Infect 2013, 141(10):2149-2157.
• [5]Lenz R, Leal JR, Church DL, Gregson DB, Ross T, Laupland KB: The distinct category of healthcare associated bloodstream infections. BMC Infect Dis 2012, 12:85. BioMed Central Full Text
• [6]Garner JS, Jarvis WR, Emori TG, Horan TC, Hughes JM: CDC definitions for nosocomial infections, 1988. Am J Infect Control 1988, 16(3):128-140.
• [7]Mayer J, Greene T, Howell J, Ying J, Rubin MA, Trick WE: Agreement in classifying bloodstream infections among multiple reviewers conducting surveillance. Clin Infect Dis 2012, 55(3):364-370.
• [8]Leal J, Gregson DB, Ross T, Flemons WW, Church DL, Laupland KB: Development of a novel electronic surveillance system for monitoring of bloodstream infections. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2010, 31(7):740-747.
• [9]Leal J, Laupland KB: Validity of electronic surveillance systems: a systematic review. J Hosp Infect 2008, 69(3):220-229.
• [10]Laupland KB, Lyytikainen O, Sogaard M, Kennedy KJ, Knudsen JD, Ostergaard C, Galbraith JC, Valiquette L, Jacobsson G, Collignon P, et al.: The changing epidemiology of Staphylococcus aureus bloodstream infection: a multinational population-based surveillance study. Clin Microbiol Infect 2013, 19(5):465-471.