Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate reader variability in screening mammograms according to the American College of Radiology Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) assessment and breast density categories. Methods: A stratified random sample of 100 mammograms was selected from a population-based breast cancer screening programme in Barcelona, Spain: 13 histopathologically confirmed breast cancers and 51 with true-negative and 36 with false-positive results. 21 expert radiologists from radiological units of breast cancer screening programmes in Catalonia, Spain, reviewed the mammography images twice within a 6-month interval. The readers described each mammography using BI-RADS assessment and breast density categories. Inter- and intraradiologist agreement was assessed using percentage of concordance and the kappa (κ) statistic. Results: Fair interobserver agreement was observed for the BI-RADS assessment [κ=0.37, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.36–0.38]. When the categories were collapsed in terms of whether additional evaluation was required (Categories III, 0, IV, V) or not (I and II), moderate agreement was found (κ=0.53, 95% CI 0.52–0.54). Intra-observer agreement for BI-RADS assessment was moderate using all categories (κ=0.53, 95% CI 0.50–0.55) and substantial on recall (κ=0.66, 95% CI 0.63–0.70). Regarding breast density, inter- and intraradiologist agreement was substantial (κ=0.73, 95% CI 0.72–0.74 and κ=0.69, 95% CI 0.68–0.70, respectively). Conclusion: We observed a substantial intra-observer agreement in the BI-RADS assessment but only moderate interobserver agreement. Both inter- and intra-observer agreement in mammographic interpretation of breast density was substantial. Advances in knowledge: Educational efforts should be made to decrease radiologists' variability in BI-RADS assessment interpretation in population-based breast screening programmes.

Background: We aimed to assess the hospital economic costs of nosocomial multi-drug resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa acquisition. Methods: A retrospective study of all hospital admissions between January 1, 2005, and December 31, 2006 was carried out in a 420-bed, urban, tertiary-care teaching hospital in Barcelona (Spain). All patients with a first positive clinical culture for P. aeruginosa more than 48 h after admission were included. Patient and hospitalization characteristics were collected from hospital and microbiology laboratory computerized records. According to antibiotic susceptibility, isolates were classified as non-resistant, resistant and multi-drug resistant. Cost estimation was based on a full-costing cost accounting system and on the criteria of clinical Activity-Based Costing methods. Multivariate analyses were performed using generalized linear models of log-transformed costs. Results: Cost estimations were available for 402 nosocomial incident P. aeruginosa positive cultures. Their distribution by antibiotic susceptibility pattern was 37.1% non-resistant, 29.6% resistant and 33.3% multi-drug resistant. The total mean economic cost per admission of patients with multi-drug resistant P. aeruginosa strains was higher than that for non-resistant strains (15,265 vs. 4,933 Euros). In multivariate analysis, resistant and multi-drug resistant strains were independently predictive of an increased hospital total cost in compared with non-resistant strains (the incremental increase in total hospital cost was more than 1.37-fold and 1.77-fold that for non-resistant strains, respectively). Conclusions: P. aeruginosa multi-drug resistance independently predicted higher hospital costs with a more than 70% increase per admission compared with non-resistant strains. Prevention of the nosocomial emergence and spread of antimicrobial resistant microorganisms is essential to limit the strong economic impact.

Background: The first wave of COVID-19 pandemic may have significantly impacted antimicrobial consumption in hospitals. The objective of this study was to assess the evolution of antimicrobial consumption during this period. Methods: A retrospective quasi-experimental before–after study was conducted in a Spanish tertiary care hospital. The study compared two periods: pre-pandemic, from January 2018 to February 2020, and during the COVID-19 pandemic from March to June 2020. Antimicrobial consumption was analyzed monthly as defined daily doses (DDD)/100 bed-days and overall hospital and ICU consumption were evaluated. Results: An increase in the hospital consumption was noticed. Although only ceftaroline achieved statistical significance (p = 0.014), a rise was observed in most of the studied antimicrobials. A clear temporal pattern was detected. While an increase in ceftriaxone and azithromycin was observed during March, an increment in the consumption of daptomycin, carbapenems, linezolid, ceftaroline, novel cephalosporin/β-lactamase inhibitors or triazoles during April–May was noticed. In the ICU, these findings were more evident, namely ceftriaxone (p = 0.029), carbapenems (p = 0.002), daptomycin (p = 0.002), azithromycin (p = 0.030), and linezolid (p = 0.011) but followed a similar temporal pattern. Conclusion: An increase in the antimicrobial consumption during the first wave of COVID-19 pandemic was noticed, especially in the ICU. Availability of updated protocols and antimicrobial stewardship programs are essential to optimize these outcomes.