PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
May 9, 2026Open Forum Infectious Diseases0 citationsOpen Access

Implementation of the BIOFIRE Meningitis/Encephalitis Panel: A Mixed-Methods Implementation Study in a Nonmetropolitan Tertiary Hospital

View Full Paper
SSShradha SubediNHN A Patrick HarrisLHLisa Hall

Key Points

  • This study aims to evaluate the implementation strategy and clinician adoption of the BIOFIRE ME panel in a nonmetropolitan tertiary hospital.
  • Mixed-methods design at Sunshine Coast University Hospital
  • Clinician knowledge and confidence assessed through surveys and semistructured interviews
  • Continuous stakeholder engagement and education sessions conducted during implementation.
  • Median perceived usefulness of rapid CSF PCR testing was 9/10.
  • Confidence in ceasing antibiotics based on results increased from 18% at 9 months to 52% at 12 months (P=0.06).
  • Qualitative analysis identified 5 themes influencing implementation, including antimicrobial stewardship and test-ordering practices.

Abstract

Abstract Background Meningitis and encephalitis (ME) are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Rapid pathogen identification is essential to guide early treatment and support antimicrobial stewardship (AMS). The BIOFIRE® FILMARRAY® ME panel allows simultaneous detection of multiple pathogens from cerebrospinal fluid. This study evaluated the implementation strategy and clinician adoption of the panel in a large nonmetropolitan tertiary hospital in Australia Method A mixed-methods study was conducted at the Sunshine Coast University Hospital following implementation of the BIOFIRE ME panel. Strategies included education sessions, testing criteria development, and continuous stakeholder engagement. Clinician knowledge, confidence, and antimicrobial decision-making practices were assessed at baseline and during implementation via surveys and semistructured interviews based on the Cabana et al conceptual framework. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, while qualitative data were analyzed thematically using Braun and Clarke's 5 step process. Results A total of 213 clinicians participated in the surveys across 4 time points. Median perceived usefulness of rapid CSF PCR testing was 9/10. Confidence in ceasing antibiotics based on the assay results increased from 18% at 9 months to 52% at 12 months (P = .06), while confidence in ceasing antivirals remained high (85%–86%). Qualitative findings identified 5 themes influencing implementation: test-ordering practices, perceived diagnostic value, trust in results, antimicrobial stewardship, and behavioral change. Confidence in interpretation was highest where infectious diseases input was available. Conclusions Implementation of the syndromic panel improved diagnostic efficiency and clinician confidence in antimicrobial decision making. Sustained education, multidisciplinary collaboration, and integration of stewardship frameworks were key to achieving successful adoption.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Subedi et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69fecfafb9154b0b82876a3bhttps://doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofag240
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Cognitive biases associated with medical decisions: a systematic review2016 · 1,004 citations
  2. 2Why Don't Physicians Follow Clinical Practice Guidelines?1999 · 6,736 citations
  3. 3Exploring the barriers and facilitators to use of point of care tests in family medicine clinics in the United States2016 · 55 citations
  4. 4Unexpectedly High False-Positive Rates for Haemophilus influenzae Using a Meningoencephalitis Syndromic PCR Panel in Two Tertiary Centers2021 · 18 citations
  5. 5Methods of Rapid Diagnosis for the Etiology of Meningitis in Adults2014 · 115 citations