Impact of time to treatment in first occurrence, non-severe Clostridioides difficile infection for elderly patients: are we waiting too long to treat?

Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE Pub Date : 2024-04-24 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1017/ash.2024.46
Rhett Vandervelde, Mark E Mlynarek, Mayur Ramesh, Nimish Patel, Michael P Veve, Benjamin A August
{"title":"Impact of time to treatment in first occurrence, non-severe <i>Clostridioides difficile</i> infection for elderly patients: are we waiting too long to treat?","authors":"Rhett Vandervelde, Mark E Mlynarek, Mayur Ramesh, Nimish Patel, Michael P Veve, Benjamin A August","doi":"10.1017/ash.2024.46","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Data evaluating timeliness of antibiotic therapy in <i>Clostridioides difficile</i> infections (CDI) are not well established. The study's purpose was to evaluate the impact of time-to-CDI treatment on disease progression.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A case-control study was performed among hospitalized patients with CDI from 1/2018 to 2/2022. Inclusion criteria were age ≥65 years, first occurrence, non-severe CDI at symptom onset, and CDI treatment for ≥72 hours. Cases included patients who progressed to severe or fulminant CDI; controls were patients without CDI progression. Time to CDI treatment was evaluated in three ways: a classification and regression tree (CART)-defined threshold, time as a continuous variable, and time as a categorical variable.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>272 patients were included; 136 with CDI progression, 136 patients without. The median (IQR) age was 74 (69-81) years, 167 (61%) were women, and 108 (40%) were immunosuppressed. CDI progression patients more commonly were toxin positive (66 [49%] vs 52 [38%], <i>P</i> = .087) with hospital-acquired disease (57 [42%] vs 29 [21%], <i>P</i> < 0.001). A CART-derived breakpoint for optimal time-to-CDI treatment of 64 hours established early (184, 68%) and delayed treatment (88, 32%). When accounting for confounding variables, delayed CDI treatment was associated with disease progression (adjOR, 4.6; 95%CI, 2.6-8.2); this was observed regardless of how time-to-CDI-active therapy was evaluated (continuous adjOR, 1.02; categorical adjOR, 2.11).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Delayed CDI treatment was associated with disease progression and could represent an important antimicrobial stewardship measure with future evaluation.</p>","PeriodicalId":72246,"journal":{"name":"Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11062792/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ash.2024.46","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Data evaluating timeliness of antibiotic therapy in Clostridioides difficile infections (CDI) are not well established. The study's purpose was to evaluate the impact of time-to-CDI treatment on disease progression.

Methods: A case-control study was performed among hospitalized patients with CDI from 1/2018 to 2/2022. Inclusion criteria were age ≥65 years, first occurrence, non-severe CDI at symptom onset, and CDI treatment for ≥72 hours. Cases included patients who progressed to severe or fulminant CDI; controls were patients without CDI progression. Time to CDI treatment was evaluated in three ways: a classification and regression tree (CART)-defined threshold, time as a continuous variable, and time as a categorical variable.

Results: 272 patients were included; 136 with CDI progression, 136 patients without. The median (IQR) age was 74 (69-81) years, 167 (61%) were women, and 108 (40%) were immunosuppressed. CDI progression patients more commonly were toxin positive (66 [49%] vs 52 [38%], P = .087) with hospital-acquired disease (57 [42%] vs 29 [21%], P < 0.001). A CART-derived breakpoint for optimal time-to-CDI treatment of 64 hours established early (184, 68%) and delayed treatment (88, 32%). When accounting for confounding variables, delayed CDI treatment was associated with disease progression (adjOR, 4.6; 95%CI, 2.6-8.2); this was observed regardless of how time-to-CDI-active therapy was evaluated (continuous adjOR, 1.02; categorical adjOR, 2.11).

Conclusion: Delayed CDI treatment was associated with disease progression and could represent an important antimicrobial stewardship measure with future evaluation.

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
治疗时间对老年患者首次发生非严重艰难梭菌感染的影响:我们是否等待治疗的时间太长了?
目的:有关艰难梭菌感染(CDI)抗生素治疗及时性的评估数据尚不完善。本研究旨在评估 CDI 治疗时间对疾病进展的影响:在2018年1月1日至2022年2月2日住院的CDI患者中开展了一项病例对照研究。纳入标准为年龄≥65岁、首次发病、症状出现时为非重症CDI、CDI治疗时间≥72小时。病例包括进展为重症或暴发性 CDI 的患者;对照组为无 CDI 进展的患者。对CDI治疗时间的评估有三种方法:分类和回归树(CART)定义的阈值、作为连续变量的时间和作为分类变量的时间。中位(IQR)年龄为 74(69-81)岁,167(61%)人为女性,108(40%)人为免疫抑制患者。CDI 进展期患者多为毒素阳性(66 [49%] vs 52 [38%],P = .087)和医院获得性疾病(57 [42%] vs 29 [21%],P < 0.001)。根据 CART 得出的最佳 CDI 治疗时间断点为 64 小时,确定了早期治疗(184 例,68%)和延迟治疗(88 例,32%)。当考虑到混杂变量时,CDI治疗延迟与疾病进展相关(adjOR,4.6;95%CI,2.6-8.2);无论如何评估CDI有效治疗时间,都能观察到这一点(连续adjOR,1.02;分类adjOR,2.11):CDI治疗延迟与疾病进展有关,可作为一项重要的抗菌药物管理措施进行评估。
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
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Effect of automated identification of antimicrobial stewardship opportunities for suspected urinary tract infections. Impacts of risk-stratified inpatient penicillin allergy label delabeling on subsequent antimicrobial spectrum index and costs. Successful adaptation of an initiative to reduce unnecessary antibiotics for acute respiratory infections across two Veteran Affairs ambulatory healthcare systems. Trends in antibiotic utilization for patients hospitalized with COVID-19 with and without signs of sepsis. Assessing a safety climate tool adapted to address respiratory illnesses in Canadian hospitals.
×
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