Intensivists' beliefs about rapid multiplex molecular diagnostic testing and its potential role in improving prescribing decisions and antimicrobial stewardship: a qualitative study.
Antimicrobial prescription
Intensive care
Rapid molecular diagnostics
Journal
Antimicrobial resistance and infection control
ISSN: 2047-2994
Titre abrégé: Antimicrob Resist Infect Control
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101585411
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
29 06 2021
29 06 2021
Historique:
received:
26
02
2021
accepted:
09
06
2021
entrez:
30
6
2021
pubmed:
1
7
2021
medline:
27
1
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Rapid molecular diagnostic tests to investigate the microbial aetiology of pneumonias may improve treatment and antimicrobial stewardship in intensive care units (ICUs). Clinicians' endorsement and uptake of these tests is crucial to maximise engagement; however, adoption may be impeded if users harbour unaddressed concerns or if device usage is incompatible with local practice. Accordingly, we strove to identify ICU clinicians' beliefs about molecular diagnostic tests for pneumonias before implementation at the point-of-care. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 35 critical care doctors working in four ICUs in the United Kingdom. A clinical vignette depicting a fictitious patient with signs of pneumonia was used to explore clinicians' beliefs about the importance of molecular diagnostics and their concerns. Data were analysed thematically. Clinicians' beliefs about molecular tests could be grouped into two categories: perceived potential of molecular diagnostics to improve antibiotic prescribing (Molecular Diagnostic Necessity) and concerns about how the test results could be implemented into practice (Molecular Diagnostic Concerns). Molecular Diagnostic Necessity stemmed from beliefs that positive results would facilitate targeted antimicrobial therapy; that negative results would signal the absence of a pathogen, and consequently that having the molecular diagnostic results would bolster clinicians' prescribing confidence. Molecular Diagnostic Concerns included unfamiliarity with the device's capabilities, worry that it would detect non-pathogenic bacteria, uncertainty whether it would fail to detect pathogens, and discomfort with withholding antibiotics until receiving molecular test results. Clinicians believed rapid molecular diagnostics for pneumonias were potentially important and were open to using them; however, they harboured concerns about the tests' capabilities and integration into clinical practice. Implementation strategies should bolster users' necessity beliefs while reducing their concerns; this can be accomplished by publicising the tests' purpose and benefits, identifying and addressing clinicians' misconceptions, establishing a trial period for first-hand familiarisation, and emphasising that, with a swift (e.g., 60-90 min) test, antibiotics can be started and refined after molecular diagnostic results become available.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Rapid molecular diagnostic tests to investigate the microbial aetiology of pneumonias may improve treatment and antimicrobial stewardship in intensive care units (ICUs). Clinicians' endorsement and uptake of these tests is crucial to maximise engagement; however, adoption may be impeded if users harbour unaddressed concerns or if device usage is incompatible with local practice. Accordingly, we strove to identify ICU clinicians' beliefs about molecular diagnostic tests for pneumonias before implementation at the point-of-care.
METHODS
We conducted semi-structured interviews with 35 critical care doctors working in four ICUs in the United Kingdom. A clinical vignette depicting a fictitious patient with signs of pneumonia was used to explore clinicians' beliefs about the importance of molecular diagnostics and their concerns. Data were analysed thematically.
RESULTS
Clinicians' beliefs about molecular tests could be grouped into two categories: perceived potential of molecular diagnostics to improve antibiotic prescribing (Molecular Diagnostic Necessity) and concerns about how the test results could be implemented into practice (Molecular Diagnostic Concerns). Molecular Diagnostic Necessity stemmed from beliefs that positive results would facilitate targeted antimicrobial therapy; that negative results would signal the absence of a pathogen, and consequently that having the molecular diagnostic results would bolster clinicians' prescribing confidence. Molecular Diagnostic Concerns included unfamiliarity with the device's capabilities, worry that it would detect non-pathogenic bacteria, uncertainty whether it would fail to detect pathogens, and discomfort with withholding antibiotics until receiving molecular test results.
CONCLUSIONS
Clinicians believed rapid molecular diagnostics for pneumonias were potentially important and were open to using them; however, they harboured concerns about the tests' capabilities and integration into clinical practice. Implementation strategies should bolster users' necessity beliefs while reducing their concerns; this can be accomplished by publicising the tests' purpose and benefits, identifying and addressing clinicians' misconceptions, establishing a trial period for first-hand familiarisation, and emphasising that, with a swift (e.g., 60-90 min) test, antibiotics can be started and refined after molecular diagnostic results become available.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34187563
doi: 10.1186/s13756-021-00961-4
pii: 10.1186/s13756-021-00961-4
pmc: PMC8243627
doi:
Substances chimiques
Anti-Bacterial Agents
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
95Investigateurs
Julie Barber
(J)
Laura Shallcross
(L)
Jeronimo Cuesta
(J)
Mark Peters
(M)
Nigel Klein
(N)
Parvez Moondi
(P)
Justin O'Grady
(J)
Juliet High
(J)
Charlotte Russell
(C)
Ann Marie Swart
(AM)
David Turner
(D)
Suveer Singh
(S)
Références
N Engl J Med. 2014 Mar 27;370(13):1198-208
pubmed: 24670166
BMJ Qual Saf. 2022 Mar;31(3):199-210
pubmed: 34099497
Semin Respir Crit Care Med. 2019 Aug;40(4):454-464
pubmed: 31585472
Curr Opin Infect Dis. 2019 Aug;32(4):356-364
pubmed: 31135388
J Hosp Infect. 2007 Apr;65(4):361-7
pubmed: 17350721
Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2004 Apr;23(4):325-31
pubmed: 15081079
Pharmacol Ther. 2021 Jan;217:107663
pubmed: 32805298
Lancet Respir Med. 2020 Feb;8(2):182-191
pubmed: 31810865
J Infect. 2020 Jan;80(1):1-7
pubmed: 31809764
Antimicrob Resist Infect Control. 2012 May 30;1(1):20
pubmed: 22958425
Chest. 2008 Mar;133(3):610-7
pubmed: 17989157
Qual Quant. 2018;52(4):1893-1907
pubmed: 29937585
J Med Eng Technol. 2015 Jan;39(1):44-53
pubmed: 25367721
Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2017 Nov;36(11):1999-2006
pubmed: 27287765
J Hosp Infect. 2019 Apr;101(4):426-427
pubmed: 30826342
Semin Respir Crit Care Med. 2017 Jun;38(3):253-263
pubmed: 28578550
Eur Respir J. 2017 Sep 10;50(3):
pubmed: 28890434
Acad Med. 2014 Sep;89(9):1245-51
pubmed: 24979285