1 / 37

OUR EXPERIENCES WITH THE PHOENIX

OUR EXPERIENCES WITH THE PHOENIX. BSAC 13 TH May 2010 J. Hancock CwmTaf Microbiology and Infectious Diseases ( MID ) Service Lead. Experiences with the PHOENIX. Why we have the Phoenix Implementation Processing Issues --- ID ---AST ---Practical experiences

ohio
Download Presentation

OUR EXPERIENCES WITH THE PHOENIX

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. OUR EXPERIENCES WITH THE PHOENIX BSAC 13TH May 2010 J. Hancock CwmTaf Microbiology and Infectious Diseases ( MID ) Service Lead

  2. Experiences with the PHOENIX • Why we have the Phoenix • Implementation • Processing • Issues --- ID ---AST ---Practical experiences ---Company support

  3. The Royal Glamorgan Hospital

  4. WHY did we have Phoenix??? • RGH Changed from Vitek 1 to Phoenix in 2005/2006 ‘Free’ from WAG !!!! Welsh Procurement led by the NPHS( PHW ) end of year capital 2005 Aim • Standardise susceptibility testing across Wales • Comparable data across Wales

  5. HOW? it was achieved across Wales Wide Consultation with clinical and laboratory scientific staff from all laboratories Agreement to :- • to use British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy systemic breakpoints • design bespoke Welsh panels • to implement according to a testing algorithm ( except RGH ) • Standardise expert interpretation rules within the system

  6. IMPLEMENTATION at RGH(first lab in Wales) • Instrument location/ Bench/BD stand • Site survey • Well ventilated /air conditioned room • Space for Epicentre • Power( red socket ) • LIS connection • Training -Two fully trained BMS staff Local training --- half day Other staff as required ---BMS, MLA, Medical Staff ---basic training

  7. IMPLEMENTATION cont’d Phoenix Sited in the Main lab Boxes of Panels stored – everywhere !!! 3 work areas :– • CL3 ( storage of boxes) • Urines/faeces • Main lab

  8. Automated system for the identification and susceptibility testing of clinically relevant bacteria State-of-the-art instrumentation Direct LIS Connection Optional EpiCenter data management Instrument Overview

  9. Phoenix Instrument • Random Panel Entry • Only 1 moving part : rotor • No pipetting of liquids or transfer of samples • Instrument Self-check • No Calibration Required • Minimal Maintenance

  10. Simple daily and weekly checks • Daily instrument report • Temperature • Panel status • LED Lights • Daily back up CD • Calibrate the Nephelometers weekly • If any checks fail – phone BD Didn’t stop us having a normaliser failure

  11. Soft-keys Simple to operate Barcode-reader Fast and easy scanning of panel number BUT Still type in specimen number - transcription errors Software Easy adding of information? BUT No training on Epicentre Phoenix Instrument

  12. Phoenix Instrument • 100(99) panel capacity (200 tests) • Incubates panels and reads every 20 minutes • Identification database • BDXpert system

  13. Use of up to date Standards EUCAST CLSI SFM Customized adjustment possible Software

  14. Identification & Susceptibility Susceptibility Leak Resistant 51 ID wells (45 substrates) 85 AST wells (doubling dilutions) Room temp storage– (AST INDICATOR -- 4◦C) One type for: GN (Enterobacteriaceae/Nonfermenters) GP(Staphylococci/Enterococci/Streptocci) Streptocci ID/AST) ONLY Gram-stain necessary! Many different AST formats available– agreed Welsh Format Phoenix Panels

  15. PHOENIX Panel Issues • Identification only • Susceptibility only 10,000 a year usage year to change panels • Agreed Welsh Format • Storage -- HUGE BOXES – room temp • Ensure the caps are on properly ( caught in the instrument )

  16. Gram negative panel Enterobacteriacae Burkholderia cepacia Pseudomonas spp Problems with :- Mucoid organisms Gram positive panel Staphylococci Enterococci Listeria Corynebacteria Not suitable for fastidious organisms ORGANISM SELECTION

  17. Validated Media • Cannot use media containing esculin • Chromagar Orientation may cause false susceptibility results when testing erythromicin with Gram+

  18. RGH Organism selection Organisms picked from - - non antibiotic containing medium HBA /heated HBA ( CHOC ) • CLED • MacConkey • Urine Chrom agar ( not the MRSA chrom)

  19. Workflow Safety with a closed panel design

  20. Phoenix Issues • Sensitivity – 2005 • EQA • Sensitivity - Present • Identification • Instrument

  21. Sensitivity 2005

  22. Initial testing issues 2005 phoenix v Etest • Trimethoprim - Staphylococci BP was 0.5 Changed to 2 in 2007 • Choramphenicol - Staphyloccocci BP issue ( 8 -16) Not on panel any more • Meropenem - P.mirabilis all Sensitive • Gentamicin – P mirabilis I eTest always Sensitive • Ertapenem – lots of I/R ?? Why ? Inoculum dependent * carbapenem resistance marker • Rifampicin – Phoenix gave - X Change of BP and issue resolved • Mupirocin - Staphylococci flagged as high level resistance with an MIC < 1 • ESBLs (1505) need to check the Cephalosporins and confirm with E test any new isolate

  23. In this year we recieved - 4 x E.coli 3 x Ps.aeruginosa 2 x E.faecalis 1 x E.faecium 6 x S.aureus - ISSUE Issue For 2 of the S.aureus isolates we scored only 1 as the Phoenix reported Erythromycin as I and it should have been R. We missed the Clindamycin dissociated resistance Summary EQA sensitivities 2005-06

  24. Summary EQA Antimicrobial sensitivities 2006-07

  25. Summary EQA sensitivities 2008-09

  26. Summary EQA Antimicrobial sensitivities 2009-10 Two sensitivity failures :- • Phx ID = Enterobacter cloacae– Expert rules changed sensitivities Actual ID = Klebsiella oxytoca Confidence limits 93% ( 99%) Human and Phoenix Error!! 2. S.aureus Penicillin R >0.25 BUT rpt organism was SENS ?? No idea ? Duff panel !!! Score = 0 Not clinically relevant!! But NEQAS relevant

  27. Sensitivity - Present

  28. Current Sensitivity Issues • Staphylococcus aureus – • - Phx result = Mupirocin High level Resistant when Low Level = Sensitive • - Phx changes Low level to Resistant • - Etest always confirms they are sensitive - COST! • - Clinical Relevance – Affects treatment of colonised patients if it is not picked up !! • Psuedomonas aeruginosa – • Phx reports Ciprofloxacin as Resistant • Etest confimation = Sensitive • - Clinical Relevance – Reported in some Respiratory Samples and is often the only oral drug available for treatment • Escherichia.coli & Klebsiella spp – • Phx reports Ertapenem as Resistant • - All Etest results = Sensitive, ? NO CONFIRMED TRUE CARBAPENAMASE RESISTANCE !

  29. Identification

  30. Summary of General EQA ID 2008-09 – Phx could not correctly identify Aeromonas hydrophilia or Vibrio parahaemoliyticus to species level and points were lost.

  31. General Bacteriology EQA 2009-10 One failure B/C isolate Phx Id of culture -S.hominis ( confidence limits 99%) Actual (NEQAS) – S.epidermidis and rpt S.epidermidis “Double Whammy” Not noted it was a B/C isolate and Reported as No Significant Growth BUT STILL ID WAS WRONG, WOULD HAVE SCORED ZERO!!!

  32. Current Identification Issues • 1) Suspected S.aureus • Phx Id’s them as a variety of Coag Neg Staphylococci • Repeat Phx, Staphaurex and DNAse plate = COST • Repeat always confirms S.aureus • Problem since new EUCAST panels were introduced • Clinical Relevance – Delay in reporting • 2) Coag Neg Staphylococcus • Rarely get the same organism to ID the same twice • Variety of confidence limits • Clinical Relevance – ICU patients with ? Line associated Infections • 3) E.Coli & Shigella • Phx has difficulty distinguishing between them • Repeat Phx and antiserum – Cost and Time • 4) Speciation of rarely isolated organisms e.g. Yersinia, Vibrio etc

  33. Instrument Issues Error Codes • 1) E18 & E23 – Normaliser Alert • - Normaliser panal ‘died’ leading to loss of panels • - Some tiers e.g. A & C stopped working overnight • - All work in these tiers aborted – LOSS OF 50 PANELS!!! • - Manual states – ‘the system will alert before expiration to allow replacement’ • - No Instrument warning • - Unable to supply engineer ( WEEK END ) • - Daily checks report showed all normalisers were working! • 2) E13 – Power Supply Failure • Back up box failed and had to be replaced

  34. Instrument issues cont’d • Epicenter front screen too “busy” • Still waiting for epicentre training !! Resulted in – - Collation of information difficult - Difficult to resolve transcription error of specimen number entry

  35. Staff Views • Easy to use • Fits in to the routine working practises • Address staff skill mix • Excellent ID to genus level not speciation • Excellent AST for routine organisms • Early ID of e.g Listeria spp / Salmonella spp • Mechanically robust

  36. Thanks Kelly Ward - Senior BMS @ RGH Robert Powell - Chief BMS @ RGH Alison King - Chief BMS @ PCH Dr Ali Omrani – Consultant Microbiologist Becton Dickenson

  37. Any Questions??

More Related