The objective of this study was to evaluate performance metrics and associated patient outcomes of an automated surveillance system, the blood Nosocomial Infection Marker (NIM)” Ridgway et al (2016).
Background: The objective of this study was to evaluate performance metrics and associated patient outcomes of an automated surveillance system, the blood Nosocomial Infection Marker (NIM).
Methods: We reviewed records of 237 patients with and 36,927 patients without blood NIM using the National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) definition for laboratory-confirmed bloodstream infection (BSI) as the gold standard. We matched cases with noncases by propensity score and estimated attributable mortality and cost of NHSN-reportable central line–associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs) and non–NHSN-reportable BSIs.
Results: For patients with central lines (CL), the blood NIM had 73.2% positive predictive value (PPV), 99.9% negative predictive value (NPV), 89.2% sensitivity, and 99.7% specificity. For all patients regardless of CL status, the blood NIM had 53.6% PPV, 99.9% NPV, 84.0% sensitivity, and 99.9% specificity. For CLABSI cases compared with noncases, mortality was 17.5% versus 9.4% (P = .098), and median charge was $143,935 (interquartile range , $89,794-$257,447) versus $115,267 (IQR, $74,937-$173,053) (P < .01). For non–NHSN-reportable BSI cases compared with noncases, mortality was 23.6% versus 6.7% (P < .0001), and median charge was $86,927 (IQR, $54,728-$156,669) versus $62,929 (IQR, $36,743-$115,693) (P < .0001).
Conclusions: The NIM is an effective screening tool for BSI. Both NHSN-reportable and nonreportable BSI cases were associated with increased mortality and cost.
Ridgway, J.P., Sun, X., Tabak, Y.P., Johannes, R.S. and Robicsek, A. (2016) Performance characteristics and associated outcomes for an automated surveillance tool for bloodstream infection. American Journal of Infection Control. February 18th. .
Thank you to our partners for supporting IVTEAM