Jordan Kirby, Marcel Leroi, Erin Cvejic, Samantha Mooney
{"title":"阴道拭子是否会改变妇产科的临床经验管理:阴道拭子的回顾性病例系列和基于活动的成本计算。","authors":"Jordan Kirby, Marcel Leroi, Erin Cvejic, Samantha Mooney","doi":"10.1111/ajo.13891","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Vaginal swab microbiological testing is commonly performed as routine clinical management for various obstetric and gynaecological presentations. The clinical utility and cost-effectiveness of vaginal swab microscopy, culture and susceptibilities (MCS) in altering empirical management is ill-defined.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>To describe the clinical use of vaginal swabs in a tertiary women's hospital emergency department (ED), measure the impact of vaginal swabs on altering empirical clinical management, and to determine the economic cost of vaginal swab MCS.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Retrospective case-series of vaginal swabs collected at a single, tertiary women's ED between January 2021 and July 2021. Symptomatology, clinical diagnosis, test results, and pre-swab and post-swab clinical management were determined upon medical record review. Economic costs of vaginal swab MCS were retrospectively determined via internal accounting records, permitting unit-level activity-based costing.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 660 vaginal swabs from 584 clinical episodes were included. Vulvovaginitis was the most common indication for swab collection (34.5%, 167 samples). Altered empirical management was observed in 9.8% of all swabs (95% CI 7.4-12.2%), with marked variability between clinical indications. Antimicrobial initiation was the most common alteration in management (8.9%, 95% CI 8.7-9.1%). The estimated cost of vaginal swab MCS was $29.71 AUD; labour, consumables and disposal costs accounted for 69.3, 29.8 and 0.9%, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The impact of vaginal swab MCS on empirical clinical management is context-specific and variable. The majority of swabs performed do not impact upon empirical management. Antimicrobial initiation is appreciably more common than antimicrobial cessation with vaginal swab results.</p>","PeriodicalId":55429,"journal":{"name":"Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Do vaginal swabs alter empirical clinical management in obstetrics and gynaecology: A retrospective case-series and activity-based costing of the vaginal swab.\",\"authors\":\"Jordan Kirby, Marcel Leroi, Erin Cvejic, Samantha Mooney\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/ajo.13891\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Vaginal swab microbiological testing is commonly performed as routine clinical management for various obstetric and gynaecological presentations. The clinical utility and cost-effectiveness of vaginal swab microscopy, culture and susceptibilities (MCS) in altering empirical management is ill-defined.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>To describe the clinical use of vaginal swabs in a tertiary women's hospital emergency department (ED), measure the impact of vaginal swabs on altering empirical clinical management, and to determine the economic cost of vaginal swab MCS.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Retrospective case-series of vaginal swabs collected at a single, tertiary women's ED between January 2021 and July 2021. Symptomatology, clinical diagnosis, test results, and pre-swab and post-swab clinical management were determined upon medical record review. Economic costs of vaginal swab MCS were retrospectively determined via internal accounting records, permitting unit-level activity-based costing.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 660 vaginal swabs from 584 clinical episodes were included. Vulvovaginitis was the most common indication for swab collection (34.5%, 167 samples). Altered empirical management was observed in 9.8% of all swabs (95% CI 7.4-12.2%), with marked variability between clinical indications. Antimicrobial initiation was the most common alteration in management (8.9%, 95% CI 8.7-9.1%). The estimated cost of vaginal swab MCS was $29.71 AUD; labour, consumables and disposal costs accounted for 69.3, 29.8 and 0.9%, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The impact of vaginal swab MCS on empirical clinical management is context-specific and variable. The majority of swabs performed do not impact upon empirical management. Antimicrobial initiation is appreciably more common than antimicrobial cessation with vaginal swab results.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55429,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/ajo.13891\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ajo.13891","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Do vaginal swabs alter empirical clinical management in obstetrics and gynaecology: A retrospective case-series and activity-based costing of the vaginal swab.
Background: Vaginal swab microbiological testing is commonly performed as routine clinical management for various obstetric and gynaecological presentations. The clinical utility and cost-effectiveness of vaginal swab microscopy, culture and susceptibilities (MCS) in altering empirical management is ill-defined.
Aims: To describe the clinical use of vaginal swabs in a tertiary women's hospital emergency department (ED), measure the impact of vaginal swabs on altering empirical clinical management, and to determine the economic cost of vaginal swab MCS.
Materials and methods: Retrospective case-series of vaginal swabs collected at a single, tertiary women's ED between January 2021 and July 2021. Symptomatology, clinical diagnosis, test results, and pre-swab and post-swab clinical management were determined upon medical record review. Economic costs of vaginal swab MCS were retrospectively determined via internal accounting records, permitting unit-level activity-based costing.
Results: A total of 660 vaginal swabs from 584 clinical episodes were included. Vulvovaginitis was the most common indication for swab collection (34.5%, 167 samples). Altered empirical management was observed in 9.8% of all swabs (95% CI 7.4-12.2%), with marked variability between clinical indications. Antimicrobial initiation was the most common alteration in management (8.9%, 95% CI 8.7-9.1%). The estimated cost of vaginal swab MCS was $29.71 AUD; labour, consumables and disposal costs accounted for 69.3, 29.8 and 0.9%, respectively.
Conclusions: The impact of vaginal swab MCS on empirical clinical management is context-specific and variable. The majority of swabs performed do not impact upon empirical management. Antimicrobial initiation is appreciably more common than antimicrobial cessation with vaginal swab results.
期刊介绍:
The Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology (ANZJOG) is an editorially independent publication owned by the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RANZCOG) and the RANZCOG Research foundation. ANZJOG aims to provide a medium for the publication of original contributions to clinical practice and/or research in all fields of obstetrics and gynaecology and related disciplines. Articles are peer reviewed by clinicians or researchers expert in the field of the submitted work. From time to time the journal will also publish printed abstracts from the RANZCOG Annual Scientific Meeting and meetings of relevant special interest groups, where the accepted abstracts have undergone the journals peer review acceptance process.