AzTrials
AzTrials

Bacterial InfectionsANSWERNCT03397433

ANti-infective Stewardship Using the Wisca Tool in the Electronic Medical Record

A study testing Information Technology physician assist in people with Bacterial Infections, run by Endeavor Health at 1 site in United States.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

Beginning in the mid-to late 1980s and accelerating through the 1990s and 2000s the shield of antibiotic invincibility began to crack sufficiently so that it was apparent to everyone we faced a serious problem. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 years and older
Conditions the study is for
Bacterial Infections
What is being tested?
Information Technology physician assist
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
9,673 participants
Where
1 siteUnited States
Study dates
15 Jun 2015to 30 Jun 2019
Phase
Interventional
Are there results?
None posted in the registry

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 18 years and older
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • Any person admitted to the hospital with pneumonia, cellulitis, intraabdominal infection, or urinary tract infection

Who cannot join

  • Any person without the 4 studied infections

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

United States1 site
  • NorthShore University HealthSystem Research Institute

    Evanston, Illinois, 60201

Other trials in United States

About this study

Beginning in the mid-to late 1980s and accelerating through the 1990s and 2000s the shield of antibiotic invincibility began to crack sufficiently so that it was apparent to everyone we faced a serious problem. The investigators will demonstrate and expand the use of information technology based on the ingenious weighted-incidence, syndromic, combination antibiogram (WISCA) tool for the widespread use of automated clinician prompts enhancing empiric antibiotic therapy as part of a comprehensive infection control stewardship program that reduces antibiotic resistance. This research program will demonstrate that use of such a tool lowers mortality, improves outcome, lowers antimicrobial resistance and reduces healthcare cost.

Read the detailed description

The decade of the 1970s was a time when the PI was completing his training and beginning a career in Infectious Diseases and Microbiology. This was an era when many new anti-infective compounds were being introduced, ranging from novel penicillins to extended-spectrum cephalosporins to aminoglycosides. The main antimicrobial resistance concern at the time was Staphylococcus aureus that was no longer susceptible to penicillin; methicillin, oxacillin, and nafcillin had solved that problem. Even for those strains that later were methicillin-resistant (MRSA), vancomycin had been available since the 1950s. Later the carbapenems and in the 1980s the newer fluoroquinolones, beginning with ciprofloxacin, were introduced for clinical use. At the time it seemed that the challenge of treating serious infection in humans had been met and that other diseases were a higher priority. Indeed, in 1978 one of the world's leaders in infectious diseases, Dr. Robert Petersdorf, commented that "Even with my great personal loyalty to Infectious Disease, I cannot conceive of the need for 309 more [graduating trainees in] infectious disease...unless they spend their time culturing each other". However, in Alexander Fleming's 1945 Nobel prize lecture he warned of the danger of antimicrobial resistance stating "it is not difficult to make microbes resistant to penicillin in the laboratory by exposing them to concentrations not sufficient to kill them, and the same thing has occurred occasionally happen in the body . . . and by exposing (his) microbes to nonlethal quantities of the drug make them resistant". It was also at this time that Infection Control began as an established discipline with CDC offering the first course in 1968 and the Joint Commission requiring a hospital position for Infection Control in 1969. Subsequently, beginning in the mid-to late 1980s and accelerating through the 1990s and 2000s the shield of antibiotic invincibility began to crack sufficiently so that it was apparent to everyone we faced a serious problem. Resistance began to be reported in Gram negative bacteria toward the newer cephalosporin, fluoroquinolone, and even the carbapenem drugs. During this same period modern medicine witnessed the emergence and spread of a new healthcare associated infection called Clostridium difficile associated diarrhea, as well as MRSA becoming pandemic. It was during this time that the initial studies focused on reversing antimicrobial resistance began. In fact, Drs. Dale Gerding and Lance Peterson undertook the first ever antibiotic cycling program using amikacin and gentamicin to demonstrate that withdrawal of an antibiotic to which resistance had developed would restore the activity of that drug. Humanity now faces a healthcare setting where as many as 70% of the bacterial infections afflicting patients are resistant to at least one antimicrobial that was initially active against historical bacterial ancestors. In a sense, the investigators have been preparing for this funding announcement for nearly an entire career - and are confident that the investigators can 'answer' the challenge of reversing antibacterial resistance and reducing that threat for healthcare-associated infections (HAIs). The objectives are in the main area that describes the focus for this application, which is Antimicrobial Stewardship: Preventing the development and spread of resistant organisms in the healthcare setting.

There are two specific aims for this research program to accomplish. They are:

  1. Specific Aim 1: Complete development of the personalized weighted-incidence, syndromic, combination antibiogram (WISCA) tool and validate its performance as a comprehensive strategy to improve the treatment of infectious diseases for all hospitalized patients.
  • The investigators will demonstrate and expand the use of information technology based on the WISCA for the widespread use of automated clinician prompts enhancing empiric antibiotic therapy as part of a comprehensive infection control stewardship program that reduces antibiotic resistance.
  1. Specific Aim 2: Demonstrate that use of such a tool improves patient outcome, lowers antimicrobial resistance and reduces cost.
  • The clinical and economic outcome measures will include changes in length of stay, duration of treatment, use of therapeutic drug monitoring, inpatient mortality, adverse events from antibacterial therapy, admission and discharge location (with the goal being fewer persons needing skilled care after discharge than is now required), 30 day readmission rates, unintended consequences from antimicrobial agent use, such as Clostridium difficile infection, antimicrobial drug cost and antimicrobial susceptibility.

All the investigator faculty are well aware of current developments in the relevant fields and are actively involved in cutting edge research that will be applied in a comprehensive, integrated fashion to solve the problem of antimicrobial resistant HAIs. The investigators look forward to working on this Large Research Project with the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality for the improvement in the care of United States citizens.

Being tested
Information Technology physician assist
Keywords
Antibiotic Stewardship, Information Technology, Healthcare Outcomes, Antibiotic Resistance, Bacterial Infection
Medical subject headings
Bacterial Infections

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • Information Technology physician assistOther

    The intervention hospitals will have a progress note placed in the electronic health record by a reviewing Infectious Disease specialist that comments on the initial antibiotic choice. The comment is based on an electronic prediction tool (Information Technology physician assist) as to what the best therapy is for the individual patient whose health record is reviewed.

Study groups in NCT03397433
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
InterventionExperimentalIn this arm, an Information Technology physician assist tool will be used to predict best available therapy for patients coming to the hospital with either pneumonia, cellulitis, intraabdominal infection, or complicated urinary tract infection. Intervention: After review of the information technology recommendation by a board certified Infectious Disease physician, the recommendation will be discussed with the primary care physician and treatment implemented.
Receives: Other: Information Technology physician assist
ControlNo interventionIn the two control hospitals there will be no use of the information technology tool for implementation of initial treatment (No intervention). No notes will be placed in the electronic health record and no contact as a result of this research will be made with the medical care team.

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Changes in length of stay

    Changes in length of hospital stay (in days) between intervention and control groups

    Measured: 36 months

  2. Rapid response to initial therapy

    Duration of treatment (in days) between intervention and control groups

    Measured: 36 Months

  3. Reduced cost of ancillary testing

    Rate of use of therapeutic drug monitoring between intervention and control groups - ancillary testing such as therapeutic drug monitoring adds to cost of anti-infective therapy and use of fewer antibiotics when they are not needed is expected to reduce this cost

    Measured: 36 months

  4. Lower mortality

    Rate of inpatient mortality between intervention and control groups

    Measured: 36 months

  5. Reduced adverse events

    Rate of adverse events from antibacterial therapy between intervention and control groups

    Measured: 36 months

  6. Improved response to Infectious Disease therapy

    Rate of change between admission and discharge location (with the goal being fewer persons needing skilled care after discharge than is now required) between intervention and control groups - improved therapy is expected to give a better response and permit patients to return home rather than needing to go to a skilled nursing facility following their inpatient therapy

    Measured: 36 months

  7. Reduced occurrence of infection recurrence

    30 day readmission rates (for repeated infection therapy) between intervention and control groups is a measure that is expected to differentiate between patients who receive optimal therapy that avoids recurrence of infection from those who do not

    Measured: 36 months (the total time frame of the crossover study)

  8. Fewer unintended consequences of antibiotic use

    Rates of Clostridium difficile infection between intervention and control groups - antibiotic use is the main cause of the unintended consequence of Clostridium difficile infection and less antibiotic use is expected to have a lower rate of Clostridium difficile infection in the intervention group

    Measured: 36 months

  9. Reduced therapy cost

    Antimicrobial drug cost between intervention and control groups

    Measured: 36 months

  10. Less antimicrobial resistance

    Antimicrobial resistance rates between intervention and control groups

    Measured: 36 months

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted12 Jan 2018
  2. Study start15 Jun 2015
  3. Primary completion31 Jul 2018
  4. Study completion30 Jun 2019

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase N/A
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomised
Intervention model
Crossover
Model description
This is a prospective, pragmatic trial of initial antibiotic prescribing review by Infectious Disease Specialists. The study involves 4 hospitals, 2 of which are intervention and 2 control for 18 months, followed by switching the intervention and control hospitals in a crossover fashion for another 18 months. Medical and economic outcomes will be assessed and reported
Masking
None (open label)
Enrolment
9,673 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT03397433
Sponsor's protocol ID
EH13-368
Acronym
ANSWER
Status last verified
Aug 2020
First submitted
29 Dec 2017
Last updated
27 Aug 2020
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
Yes

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing Information Technology physician assist in people with Bacterial Infections, run by Endeavor Health at 1 site in United States.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 27 Aug 2020. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Changes in length of stay (time frame: 36 months). The study lists 10 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 27 Aug 2020.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in