Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Background:Clostridiodes difficile is the leading healthcare-associated pathogen, with significant morbidity associated with acute C. difficile infection (CDI). However, polymerase chain reaction stool testing is unable to differentiate colonization from infection, leading to frequent overdiagnosis, unnecessary iatrogenesis, and additional costs. As a result, IDSA guidelines do not recommend C. difficile testing in patients with diarrheal symptoms attributed to other causes, including laxatives. Our group has previously investigated the use of a computerized clinical decision support (CCDS) tool to reduce inappropriate C. difficile testing in a single tertiary-care health system, with a subsequent 41% reduction in testing. We investigated the reduction in proportion of inappropriately completed tests with the randomized addition of a laxative alert to our existing CCDS. Methods: An existing electronic medical record-based CCDS tool was augmented by the addition of an automatic alert that notified the user if a patient received any of a set of identified laxative medications within 48 hours. During the 78-day pilot period, users encountered the existing CCDS or the CCDS with laxative alert (CCDS-LA), randomized by patient identification number. A proportional χ2 analysis was used to compare the proportion of aborted to completed tests among patients who met laxative criteria in the CCDS versus CCDS-LA groups. Results: In total, 187 test orders were attempted during the pilot period in 119 patients meeting the laxative alert criteria, with 43.3% order attempts randomized to the existing CCDS and 56.7% to the CCDS-LA. Of order attempts via the CCDS-LA, 50.0% were completed, compared to 64.2% of orders completed via the existing CCDS (22.1% relative reduction in test completion; P = .0525). Conclusions: We demonstrated substantially fewer completed C. difficile tests among patients receiving laxatives who were randomized to modified laxative-alert CCDS. Although our result did not reach statistical significance, the trend toward reduced inappropriate testing prompted the CCDS-LA alert to be adopted hospital-wide following completion of the test period. Further analyses of the pre- and postintervention periods are required to determine whether this intervention significantly impacts testing rates over time, as well as to determine the durability and safety of the CCDS-LA. Additional analyses are also needed to assess the impacts on hospital-onset CDI rate and the associated costs.
Funding: None
Disclosures: None
