Implementation of an Automated Antibiotic Time Out at a Comprehensive Cancer Center

Frank P Tverdek, S. Aitken, V. Mulanovich, Javier A Adachi, Cai Wu, Sherry Cantu, P. McDaneld, Roy F. Chemaly
{"title":"Implementation of an Automated Antibiotic Time Out at a Comprehensive Cancer Center","authors":"Frank P Tverdek, S. Aitken, V. Mulanovich, Javier A Adachi, Cai Wu, Sherry Cantu, P. McDaneld, Roy F. Chemaly","doi":"10.1093/ofid/ofae235","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n \n Antimicrobial stewardship programs can optimize antimicrobial use and have been federally mandated in all hospitals. However, best stewardship practices in immunocompromised patients with cancer are not well established.\n \n \n \n An antimicrobial time-out, in the form of an email, was sent to physicians caring for hospitalized patients reaching 5 days of therapy for targeted antimicrobials (daptomycin, linezolid, tigecycline, vancomycin, imipenem/cilastatin, meropenem) in a comprehensive cancer center. Physicians were to discontinue the antimicrobial if unnecessary or document a rationale for continuation. This is a quasi-experimental, interrupted time series analysis assessing antimicrobial use during the following times: Period 1 (pre time-out: 1/2007–6/2010) and Period 2 (post time-out: 7/2010 –3/2015). The primary antimicrobial consumption metric was mean duration of therapy. Days of therapy per 1,000 patient days (DOT/1000 PD) were also assessed.\n \n \n \n Implementation of the time-out was associated with a significant decrease in mean duration of therapy for the following antimicrobials; daptomycin: -0.89 d (95% CI -1.38 – -0.41); linezolid: -0.89 d (95% CI -1.27 – -0.52); meropenem: -0.97 d (95% CI -1.39 – -0.56); tigecycline: -1.41 d (95% CI -2.19 – -0.63); p < 0.001 for each comparison. DOT/1000 PD decreased significantly for meropenem (-43.49, 95% CI -58.61 – -28.37, p < 0.001), tigecycline (-35.47, 95% CI -44.94 – -26.00, p < 0.001), and daptomycin (-9.47, 95% CI -15.25 – -3.68, p = 0.002).\n \n \n \n A passive day 5 time-out was associated with reduction in targeted antibiotic use in a cancer center and could potentially be successfully adopted to several settings and electronic health records.\n","PeriodicalId":510506,"journal":{"name":"Open Forum Infectious Diseases","volume":"82 16","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Open Forum Infectious Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofae235","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Antimicrobial stewardship programs can optimize antimicrobial use and have been federally mandated in all hospitals. However, best stewardship practices in immunocompromised patients with cancer are not well established. An antimicrobial time-out, in the form of an email, was sent to physicians caring for hospitalized patients reaching 5 days of therapy for targeted antimicrobials (daptomycin, linezolid, tigecycline, vancomycin, imipenem/cilastatin, meropenem) in a comprehensive cancer center. Physicians were to discontinue the antimicrobial if unnecessary or document a rationale for continuation. This is a quasi-experimental, interrupted time series analysis assessing antimicrobial use during the following times: Period 1 (pre time-out: 1/2007–6/2010) and Period 2 (post time-out: 7/2010 –3/2015). The primary antimicrobial consumption metric was mean duration of therapy. Days of therapy per 1,000 patient days (DOT/1000 PD) were also assessed. Implementation of the time-out was associated with a significant decrease in mean duration of therapy for the following antimicrobials; daptomycin: -0.89 d (95% CI -1.38 – -0.41); linezolid: -0.89 d (95% CI -1.27 – -0.52); meropenem: -0.97 d (95% CI -1.39 – -0.56); tigecycline: -1.41 d (95% CI -2.19 – -0.63); p < 0.001 for each comparison. DOT/1000 PD decreased significantly for meropenem (-43.49, 95% CI -58.61 – -28.37, p < 0.001), tigecycline (-35.47, 95% CI -44.94 – -26.00, p < 0.001), and daptomycin (-9.47, 95% CI -15.25 – -3.68, p = 0.002). A passive day 5 time-out was associated with reduction in targeted antibiotic use in a cancer center and could potentially be successfully adopted to several settings and electronic health records.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在综合癌症中心实施抗生素自动超时疗法
抗菌药物管理计划可以优化抗菌药物的使用,联邦政府已强制要求所有医院实施该计划。然而,针对免疫力低下的癌症患者的最佳管理实践尚未得到很好的确立。 一家综合癌症中心以电子邮件的形式向住院患者的主治医师发送了抗菌药物超时通知,患者使用靶向抗菌药物(达托霉素、利奈唑烷、替加环素、万古霉素、亚胺培南/西司他丁、美罗培南)治疗达到 5 天后,医生将停用这些药物。如果没有必要,医生应停用抗菌药物,或记录继续使用的理由。这是一项准实验性间断时间序列分析,评估以下时间段的抗菌药物使用情况:第一阶段(超时前:2007 年 1 月至 2010 年 6 月)和第二阶段(超时后:2010 年 7 月至 2015 年 3 月)。抗菌素消耗的主要指标是平均治疗时间。此外,还评估了每千名患者的治疗天数(DOT/1000 PD)。 暂停使用与以下抗菌药物的平均治疗时间显著缩短有关:达托霉素:-0.89 天(95% CI -1.38 --0.41);利奈唑烷:-0.89 天(95% CI -1.27 --0.52);美罗培南:-0.97 天(95% CI -1.39 --0.56);替加环素:-1.41 天(95% CI -2.19 --0.63);各项比较的 p <0.001。美罗培南(-43.49,95% CI -58.61 -28.37,p <0.001)、替加环素(-35.47,95% CI -44.94 -26.00,p <0.001)和达托霉素(-9.47,95% CI -15.25 -3.68,p = 0.002)的 DOT/1000 PD 显著下降。 第 5 天被动超时与癌症中心减少靶向抗生素的使用有关,有可能被成功应用于多种环境和电子健康记录中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Association of Staphylococcus aureus bacterial load and colonization sites with the risk of postoperative S. aureus infection Estimating and explaining the differences in healthcare seeking by symptom burden among persons with presumptive tuberculosis. Findings from a population-based tuberculosis prevalence survey in a high-burden setting in India Higher Prevalence of Immunosuppression Among US Adults: Implications for COVID-19 and Respiratory Pathogen Vaccinations High hepatitis B prevalence and vaccination needs among transgender women and men sex workers in Barcelona, Spain Cabotegravir + Rilpivirine Long-Acting: Overview of Injection Guidance, Injection Site Reactions, and Best Practices for Intramuscular Injection Administration
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1