Comparison of film array pneumonia panel to routine diagnostic methods and its potential impact in an adult intensive care unit in Hong Kong and the potential role of emergency departments

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundPneumonia is a leading diagnosis for patients requiring critical care. Prediction of the causal organisms has proved challenging, and antibiotic overuse is a burning issue.ObjectiveThis study aimed to compare the results of the BioFire FilmArray Pneumonia Panel (PN Panel) to standard diagnostic methods and evaluate its potential impact in an intensive care unit (ICU).MethodsThis is a retrospective study including adult patients admitted to the ICUs with a diagnosis of pneumonia. The agreement between the PN panel results and the standard diagnostic method was analyzed. Actual and potential adjustments of antimicrobials after the PN panel results were reviewed and compared.ResultsTwo hundred ninety three patients with pneumonia were included. The PN panel identified at least one pathogen in 159 specimens (54.2%), while the standard diagnostic method identified at least one pathogen in 132 specimens (45.0%). Positive percentage agreement between the PN panel and standard‐of‐care culture reached 94%, and negative percentage agreement reached 97%. Among 293 patients, the availability of PN results led to escalation of antimicrobials in 38 (19%) patients and de‐escalation or discontinuation of antimicrobials in 95 (32.4%) patients.ConclusionThis pilot study showed the PN panel could provide accurate results on the causative pathogens and detect resistant bacteria. It could reduce the use of broad‐spectrum antibiotics and overall antibiotic use. If the PN panel could be checked at the emergency department, targeted antibiotics could be administered when the patient arrived at the ICU.