P-829. Words Matter: Impact of Microbiology Laboratory Result Presentation on Antibiotic Stewardship

Abstract Background Advancements in laboratory diagnostics are continually occurring and accuracy in interpreting results directly affects optimal patient care. In 2019, Wesley Healthcare surveyed providers on their interpretation of common microbiology results. Feedback led to several updates in how common organisms were reported. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether these changes in reporting positively impacted clinical decisions made from the updated results.Blood cultures positive for S. aureus Pre-InterventionBlood cultures positive for S. aureus Post-Intervention Methods This quasi-experimental study evaluated the impact of different verbiage on common microbiology results. A survey with six patient cases was sent to providers in 2019 and 2024. Patient cases remained the same in each survey, but utilized the current presentation of microbiology results at the time of the survey. Recipients were asked to make clinical decisions based on the microbiology results presented. The topics included de-escalation of antibiotics based on polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for positive blood cultures (Images 1 and 2), evaluation of C. difficile PCR and enzyme immunoassays, impact of recent immunization on S. pneumoniae urine antigen results, susceptibilities of Group C Streptococcus and H. influenzae (Images 3 and 4), and understanding of minimum inhibitory concentrations (MIC). Chi-squared statistics were used to compare results.H. Influenzae Results (Pre-Intervention)H. Influenzae Results (Post-Intervention) Results Several trends were seen in both groups. Questions accompanied by lab results that included detailed comments had the highest percentage of correct responses. This included our C. difficile (Pre: 92%, Post: 98%) and S. pneumoniae urine antigen (Pre: 95%, Post: 94%) results. Culture results without any guidance or adjustment between surveys (Group C Streptococcus, Pre:72%, Post: 81%), had sustained lower rates of correct interpretation and resulted in provider reluctance to de-escalate antibiotics. Culture results which had guidance added between the two time periods had a significant increase in percentage of correct responses. This included blood cultures results by PCR (Pre: 58%, Post: 92%, p= < 0.0001) and H. influenzae (Pre: 86%, Post: 98%, p= < 0.02). Conclusion Addition of detailed interpretative comments to microbiology results may lead to improved de-escalation and promote appropriate antibiotic selection. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Open Forum Infectious Diseases
Published
2026-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofaf695.1037
Primary Topic
Bacterial Identification and Susceptibility Testing
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

P-829. Words Matter: Impact of Microbiology Laboratory Result Presentation on Antibiotic Stewardship

Christina M. Brummett, Nick R Harris, Stephanie Harding
Open Forum Infectious Diseases
Bacterial Identification and Susceptibility Testing
article

P-829. Words Matter: Impact of Microbiology Laboratory Result Presentation on Antibiotic Stewardship

Christina M. Brummett, Nick R Harris, Stephanie Harding
article en

Abstract

Abstract Background Advancements in laboratory diagnostics are continually occurring and accuracy in interpreting results directly affects optimal patient care. In 2019, Wesley Healthcare surveyed providers on their interpretation of common microbiology results. Feedback led to several updates in how common organisms were reported. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether these changes in reporting positively impacted clinical decisions made from the updated results.Blood cultures positive for S. aureus Pre-InterventionBlood cultures positive for S. aureus Post-Intervention Methods This quasi-experimental study evaluated the impact of different verbiage on common microbiology results. A survey with six patient cases was sent to providers in 2019 and 2024. Patient cases remained the same in each survey, but utilized the current presentation of microbiology results at the time of the survey. Recipients were asked to make clinical decisions based on the microbiology results presented. The topics included de-escalation of antibiotics based on polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for positive blood cultures (Images 1 and 2), evaluation of C. difficile PCR and enzyme immunoassays, impact of recent immunization on S. pneumoniae urine antigen results, susceptibilities of Group C Streptococcus and H. influenzae (Images 3 and 4), and understanding of minimum inhibitory concentrations (MIC). Chi-squared statistics were used to compare results.H. Influenzae Results (Pre-Intervention)H. Influenzae Results (Post-Intervention) Results Several trends were seen in both groups. Questions accompanied by lab results that included detailed comments had the highest percentage of correct responses. This included our C. difficile (Pre: 92%, Post: 98%) and S. pneumoniae urine antigen (Pre: 95%, Post: 94%) results. Culture results without any guidance or adjustment between surveys (Group C Streptococcus, Pre:72%, Post: 81%), had sustained lower rates of correct interpretation and resulted in provider reluctance to de-escalate antibiotics. Culture results which had guidance added between the two time periods had a significant increase in percentage of correct responses. This included blood cultures results by PCR (Pre: 58%, Post: 92%, p= < 0.0001) and H. influenzae (Pre: 86%, Post: 98%, p= < 0.02). Conclusion Addition of detailed interpretative comments to microbiology results may lead to improved de-escalation and promote appropriate antibiotic selection. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

Open Forum Infectious DiseasesVol. 13(Supplement_1)
Wesley Medical Center (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 89%
Bacterial Identification and Susceptibility Testing
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.