Comparison of turnaround time and time to oseltamivir discontinuation between two respiratory viral panel testing methodologies.

Primary Endpoint • Turnaround )me (TAT) for RVP result Secondary Endpoint • Time to discon)nua)on of empiric oseltamivir following nega)ve RVP result (nega)ve for influenza) Experimental Design Retrospec)ve, observa)onal, single-­‐center study • Analysis period: 12/1/2011-­‐2/28/2013 Inclusion criteria • Age ≥ 18 years old, with an RVP result reported • All adult pa)ents with an RVP test result reported between 12/1/2011-­‐2/28/2012 performed on LxT and 12/1/2012-­‐2/28/2013 performed on BDFA were evaluated for average TAT (defined as the )me period between when the specimen was received to the )me when the result was reported). • Among pa)ents with influenza nega)ve RVP results, the )me to discon)nua)on of empiric oseltamivir was also determined. • The shorter TAT and reduced laboratory handling )me with the BDFA RVP has important clinical advantages. • Consistent with previous literature, we found the use of the BDFA RVP to be associated with a significantly shorter average TAT (3.1 vs. 46.4 hours) compared to LxT. • The dura)on of empiric oseltamivir among pa)ents found to be influenza nega)ve was reduced by 50% with the improved TAT of the BDFA RVP. • The reduc)on in average )me to discon)nua)on of empiric oseltamivir resulted in cost-­‐savings of approximately 34.16 dollars per pa)ent (using wholesale acquisi)on cost (WAC) for oseltamivir, 8.54 dollars per dose), which during the 2012-­‐2013 peak influenza season would be an overall cost-­‐savings of 2527.84 dollars Results