Retrospective study of prevalence of Community Associated Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus (CA-MRSA) seen in Texas MedClinics, San Antonio, TX from April 2006-August 2009

Purpose. To evaluate the presence of Community Associated–Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus, CA-MRSA, in abscesses and skin and soft tissue infections presenting at 9 urgent care clinics in San Antonio, TX. ^ Methods. During the 40-month retrospective study (April 2006 to August 2009), wound cultures collected in 9 urgent care centers were evaluated for MRSA growth, antibiotics prescribed, follow up wound care, and antibiotic prescribing habits by physicians for all patients presenting with abscesses and skin/soft tissue infections. ^ Results. Across 9 urgent care centers in San Antonio, TX, 36,797 abscesses and cases of skin and soft tissue infections were treated during 40 months. Of the 36,797 cases, 9290 patients had wound cultures sent with 5,630 cultures sent to Texas MedClinic’s primary lab. Of the 5630 cultures sent to their primary lab, this reflected a prevalence of 4727 (84 %) cultures were positive for MRSA. Of the 9290 patients who had a wound culture sent (April 10th, 2006 to August 31st, 2009), a total of 4,307 antibiotics were prescribed. The top five antibiotics prescribed for CA-MRSA were Bactrim (55.5%), Clindamycin (18.4%), Bactroban (5%), Amoxicillin (3.5%), and Doxycycline (3%) representing 85.4% of the antibiotics prescribed. 8809/9290 (94.8%) of patients required no more than 3 follow up visits. Of the 33 physicians working full time during the entire study period, 29/33 (87.8%) of the physicians were family medicine physicians and represented varied prescribing rates of antibiotics between 11-76% with 26/33 (78.8%) of physicians prescribing antibiotics greater than 40% of the time.^ Conclusions. Abscesses and soft tissue infections are a common presenting complaint to urgent care centers. This study reveals that antibiotic-prescribing practices can be improved with physician education since this high prevalence was not known previously. Also, treating abscesses with limited packing has been shown to be a viable option in this particular circumstance and would be open field for additional clinical research. Due to the high prevalence of CA-MRSA skin and soft tissue infections among patients presenting to urgent care centers presumptive treatment for MRSA is indicated. Increasing levels of resistance to penicillin antibiotics is concerning and warrants alternative antibiotic management strategies.^

Costs and quality of medication reconciliation practice in primary care clinics

Medication reconciliation, with the aim to resolve medication discrepancy, is one of the Joint Commission patient safety goals. Medication errors and adverse drug events that could result from medication discrepancy affect a large population. At least 1.5 million adverse drug events and $3.5 billion of financial burden yearly associated with medication errors could be prevented by interventions such as medication reconciliation. This research was conducted to answer the following research questions: (1a) What are the frequency range and type of measures used to report outpatient medication discrepancy? (1b) Which effective and efficient strategies for medication reconciliation in the outpatient setting have been reported? (2) What are the costs associated with medication reconciliation practice in primary care clinics? (3) What is the quality of medication reconciliation practice in primary care clinics? (4) Is medication reconciliation practice in primary care clinics cost-effective from the clinic perspective? Study designs used to answer these questions included a systematic review, cost analysis, quality assessments, and cost-effectiveness analysis. Data sources were published articles in the medical literature and data from a prospective workflow study, which included 150 patients and 1,238 medications. The systematic review confirmed that the prevalence of medication discrepancy was high in ambulatory care and higher in primary care settings. Effective strategies for medication reconciliation included the use of pharmacists, letters, a standardized practice approach, and partnership between providers and patients. Our cost analysis showed that costs associated with medication reconciliation practice were not substantially different between primary care clinics using or not using electronic medical records (EMR) ($0.95 per patient per medication in EMR clinics vs. $0.96 per patient per medication in non-EMR clinics, p=0.78). Even though medication reconciliation was frequently practiced (97-98%), the quality of such practice was poor (0-33% of process completeness measured by concordance of medication numbers and 29-33% of accuracy measured by concordance of medication names) and negatively (though not significantly) associated with medication regimen complexity. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for concordance of medication number per patient per medication and concordance of medication names per patient per medication were both 0.08, favoring EMR. Future studies including potential cost-savings from medication features of the EMR and potential benefits to minimize severity of harm to patients from medication discrepancy are warranted. ^