This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Right arrow Copyright Information
Right arrow Books from ASM Press
Right arrow MicrobeWorld
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Morris, A. J.
Right arrow Articles by Reller, L. B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Morris, A. J.
Right arrow Articles by Reller, L. B.

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Journal of Clinical Microbiology, 07 1996, 1776-1778, Vol 34, No. 7
Copyright © 1996 by the American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.

Contemporary testing for enteric pathogens: the potential for cost, time, and health care savings

AJ Morris, PR Murray and LB Reller
Clinical Microbiology Laboratory, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina 27710, USA.

We sent a questionnaire to 79 clinical microbiology laboratories seeking information on contemporary practices when investigating for bacterial and protozoan enteric pathogens. Data from the 67 respondents (response rate of 85%) showed that a minority of laboratories (40% for stool culture and 45% for ova and parasite [O&P] examinations) had restrictions for testing in place and that fewer laboratories (24% for stool culture and 19% for O&P examinations) rejected specimens from patients who had been in the hospital for > 3 days. Using two estimates, 15 and 40%, for the proportion of all specimens received from patients in the hospital for > 3 days, we calculated savings for the average hospital in this survey. Reagent savings of $4,000 to $10,000 and time savings of 274 to 731 h per year might have been realized. Moreover, between $26,000 and $71,000 in patient charges could have been prevented. On the basis of this survey, wider application of rejection criteria when testing for enteric pathogens appears possible. If implemented, savings to the nation's health care system could be between $27 and $73 million a year.


This article has been cited by other articles:

  • Katanik, M. T., Schneider, S. K., Rosenblatt, J. E., Hall, G. S., Procop, G. W. (2001). Evaluation of ColorPAC Giardia/Cryptosporidium Rapid Assay and ProSpecT Giardia/Cryptosporidium Microplate Assay for Detection of Giardia and Cryptosporidium in Fecal Specimens. J. Clin. Microbiol. 39: 4523-4525 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Bauer, T. M., Lalvani, A., Fehrenbach, J., Steffen, I., Aponte, J. J., Segovia, R., Vila, J., Philippczik, G., Steinbruckner, B., Frei, R., Bowler, I., Kist, M. (2001). Derivation and Validation of Guidelines for Stool Cultures for Enteropathogenic Bacteria Other Than Clostridium difficile in Hospitalized Adults. JAMA 285: 313-319 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Zaidi, A. K. M., Macone, A., Goldmann, A. a. D. (1999). Impact of Simple Screening Criteria on Utilization of Low-yield Bacterial Stool Cultures in a Children's Hospital. Pediatrics 103: 1189-1192 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Acheson, D. W.K., Wolf, L. E., Park, C. H., Rossboth, D. W., Tarr, P. I., Stapleton, A. E., Wilson, R. A., Rondeau, E., Peraldi, M.-N. (1997). Escherichia coli and the Hemolytic-Uremic Syndrome. NEJM 336: 515-516 [Full Text]  


Copyright © 2009 by the American Society for Microbiology.   For an alternate route to Journals.ASM.org, visit: http://intl-journals.asm.org | More Info»