Prescient Healthcare
AMR Resistance Scoring

Sharpening Empiric Antibiotic Decisions at a Community Hospital

240-bed community hospital · Antimicrobial stewardship program · inpatient · 6 min read

A community hospital's antimicrobial stewardship program used Prescient's AMR resistance scoring to give prescribers a patient-specific resistance risk at the point of empiric ordering — while culture and sensitivity results were still pending. This layered patient-level risk on top of the unit-level antibiogram the team already relied on.

At a Glance

Organization
240-bed community hospital
Scope
Inpatient empiric prescribing
Team involved
Antimicrobial stewardship program
EHR environment
Single EHR, HL7 FHIR integration
Pillar deployed
AMR Resistance Scoring
Time to go-live
~7 weeks from discovery

Representative example. This is an illustrative case study built from an anonymized customer archetype to show the shape of a Prescient engagement and its reporting. The scenario and all figures are representative examples, not published results from a named customer.

Results at a Glance

What Changed

↑ 17 pts
Empiric therapy aligned with sensitivity
illustrative, vs. baseline
0
New systems in the prescribing workflow
risk surfaced inside existing order entry
100%
Scores paired with contributing factors
for prescriber transparency

Illustrative figures — representative of the reporting structure, not published results.

The Challenge

Where they started

Empiric antibiotic selection at the hospital leaned heavily on unit-level antibiograms. Those aggregate patterns are useful, but they miss the resistance risk factors specific to an individual patient — prior cultures, recent antibiotic exposure, facility transfers, and device history.

In the 24–72 hours before cultures and sensitivities returned, prescribers had no systematic, patient-level view of resistance risk. The stewardship team wanted to add that view without bolting a separate system onto the prescribing workflow.

  • Empiric antibiotic selection leaned on unit-level antibiograms alone, which miss patient-specific resistance risk factors.
  • Prescribers had no systematic view of an individual patient's resistance risk in the 24–72 hours before cultures returned.
  • The stewardship team wanted patient-level visibility without adding a separate system to the prescribing workflow.

The Solution

Patient-level resistance risk at the point of prescribing

Prescient's resistance score was developed in partnership with the stewardship program and calibrated against the hospital's own local resistance patterns, then validated against the facility's culture history before it ever surfaced to a prescriber.

At go-live, the patient-specific resistance risk began appearing alongside standard antibiogram guidance inside the existing empiric prescribing workflow — with the contributing factors shown, so the prescriber saw why a patient was flagged as higher risk.

How data flowed in this deployment

Culture & Exposure History

Prior cultures, antibiotic exposure, and facility transfer history.

Resistance Scoring

Patient-specific risk blended with local resistance patterns.

Empiric Prescribing View

Resistance risk surfaces alongside the antibiogram at order time.

Stewardship Review

Culture results confirm or adjust; the score updates going forward.

The Approach

How the Deployment Unfolded

  1. Weeks 1–3
    Partnership with stewardship

    Scoring was developed in partnership with the antimicrobial stewardship program and calibrated against the hospital's local resistance patterns.

  2. Weeks 4–6
    Validation against local data

    The resistance score was validated against the facility's own culture history before surfacing to prescribers.

  3. Week 7
    Go-live at point of prescribing

    The patient-level resistance risk began surfacing alongside the empiric prescribing workflow, next to standard antibiogram guidance.

  4. Ongoing
    Stewardship review

    As culture results returned, the stewardship team reviewed therapy alignment and the score updated for similar future cases.

The Results

Measured Against Their Own Baseline

Empiric therapy alignment — illustrative before/after

Empiric selection aligned with eventual sensitivity
Baseline
61%
With Prescient
78%
Broad-spectrum starts later de-escalated
Baseline
44%
With Prescient
58%

Illustrative example only, not a published result — calibrated to and measured against the facility's own resistance patterns.

Empiric therapy aligned with eventual sensitivity

Illustrative trend as prescribers and stewardship incorporated the score into empiric decisions.

Every metric is benchmarked against the health system's own pre-deployment baseline — not an industry average — so the impact reflects that system's patients, units, and workflows. See our outcome methodology →

Key Takeaways

What Made It Work

1

Patient-level resistance risk layered onto — not replaced — the existing antibiogram.

2

Scoring was calibrated and validated against the facility's own local resistance data.

3

The risk surfaced inside existing order entry, adding no new system for prescribers.

4

It informs empiric therapy; the prescribing decision remains the clinician's.

It didn't tell us what to prescribe. It gave the prescriber one more patient-specific input at the moment of the decision, instead of the unit average alone. Our stewardship reviews got easier because of it.
Antimicrobial Stewardship Pharmacistparticipating community hospital

Representative quote illustrating the kind of feedback this engagement is designed to produce — not attributed to a named individual.

The Platform Behind This

AMR Resistance Scoring

Score antimicrobial resistance risk before the culture comes back.

Explore the pillar

Frequently Asked

Questions About This Scenario

No — it gives prescribers a risk-informed starting point for empiric therapy while cultures are pending. It does not replace microbiology testing, and therapy is confirmed or adjusted as results return.

Bring This to Your Hospital System