Antibiotic Length of Therapy: Is Shorter Better in Older Adults?

Q2 Medicine Senior Care Pharmacist Pub Date : 2025-01-01 DOI:10.4140/TCP.n.2025.18
Alice N Hemenway, Caitlyn Patton, Elias B Chahine
{"title":"Antibiotic Length of Therapy: Is Shorter Better in Older Adults?","authors":"Alice N Hemenway, Caitlyn Patton, Elias B Chahine","doi":"10.4140/TCP.n.2025.18","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background</b> Antibiotic lengths of therapy (LOT) vary widely, based on infection type, antibiotic regimen, and patient characteristics. Longer LOT are associated with increased risk of antibiotic resistance, adverse effects, and health care costs. There are increasing data supporting shorter LOT for many infections based on randomized, controlled trials (RCTs). <b>Objective</b> To evaluate RCTs supporting shorter antibiotic LOT for common infections, with an emphasis on applying the data to older adults. <b>Data Sources</b> A list of RCTs that evaluated shorter LOT for common infections was first gathered from the website of Brad Spellberg, MD, at <ext-link ext-link-type=\"uri\" xlink:href=\"https://www.bradspellberg.com/shorter-is-better\">https://www.bradspellberg.com/shorter-is-better</ext-link>. The list was then verified through a PubMed search using the terms for each infection and LOT. <b>Data Synthesis</b> Of the 28 identified RCTs, 27 supported shorter antibiotic LOT. These trials were categorized by disease states: complicated urinary tract infections including pyelonephritis (n = 9), community-acquired pneumonia (n = 6), hospital-acquired pneumonia/ ventilator-associated pneumonia (n = 3), skin and soft tissue infections (n = 4), complicated intra-abdominal infections (n = 2), and gram-negative bacteremia (n = 3). The single incongruent trial was conducted on male patients with complicated urinary tract infections, and the results could be explained by a lower than usual dose of antibiotic utilized in the study. <b>Discussion</b> Many RCTs have demonstrated the safety and efficacy of shorter antibiotic LOT for the disease states included in this review. Several of these trials enrolled older adults. <b>Conclusion</b> There are sufficient data to support using shorter antibiotic LOT in older patients. Implementing this strategy can help pharmacists and other health care professionals optimize antibiotic use in older adults.</p>","PeriodicalId":41635,"journal":{"name":"Senior Care Pharmacist","volume":"40 1","pages":"18-31"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Senior Care Pharmacist","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4140/TCP.n.2025.18","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background Antibiotic lengths of therapy (LOT) vary widely, based on infection type, antibiotic regimen, and patient characteristics. Longer LOT are associated with increased risk of antibiotic resistance, adverse effects, and health care costs. There are increasing data supporting shorter LOT for many infections based on randomized, controlled trials (RCTs). Objective To evaluate RCTs supporting shorter antibiotic LOT for common infections, with an emphasis on applying the data to older adults. Data Sources A list of RCTs that evaluated shorter LOT for common infections was first gathered from the website of Brad Spellberg, MD, at https://www.bradspellberg.com/shorter-is-better. The list was then verified through a PubMed search using the terms for each infection and LOT. Data Synthesis Of the 28 identified RCTs, 27 supported shorter antibiotic LOT. These trials were categorized by disease states: complicated urinary tract infections including pyelonephritis (n = 9), community-acquired pneumonia (n = 6), hospital-acquired pneumonia/ ventilator-associated pneumonia (n = 3), skin and soft tissue infections (n = 4), complicated intra-abdominal infections (n = 2), and gram-negative bacteremia (n = 3). The single incongruent trial was conducted on male patients with complicated urinary tract infections, and the results could be explained by a lower than usual dose of antibiotic utilized in the study. Discussion Many RCTs have demonstrated the safety and efficacy of shorter antibiotic LOT for the disease states included in this review. Several of these trials enrolled older adults. Conclusion There are sufficient data to support using shorter antibiotic LOT in older patients. Implementing this strategy can help pharmacists and other health care professionals optimize antibiotic use in older adults.

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
抗生素治疗时间:对老年人越短越好?
背景:根据感染类型、抗生素治疗方案和患者特征,抗生素治疗长度(LOT)变化很大。较长的LOT与抗生素耐药性、不良反应和卫生保健费用增加的风险有关。越来越多的数据支持基于随机对照试验(rct)的许多感染的LOT缩短。目的评价支持较短抗生素LOT治疗常见感染的随机对照试验,重点是将数据应用于老年人。一份评估较短LOT治疗常见感染的随机对照试验列表首先从Brad Spellberg医学博士的网站https://www.bradspellberg.com/shorter-is-better上收集。然后使用每种感染和LOT的术语通过PubMed搜索验证该列表。经鉴定的28项随机对照试验中,27项支持较短的抗生素LOT。这些试验按疾病状态分类:合并尿路感染包括肾盂肾炎(n = 9)、社区获得性肺炎(n = 6)、医院获得性肺炎/呼吸机相关性肺炎(n = 3)、皮肤及软组织感染(n = 4)、合并腹腔内感染(n = 2)、革兰氏阴性菌血症(n = 3)。这一结果可以解释为研究中使用的抗生素剂量低于正常剂量。许多随机对照试验已经证明了短抗生素LOT治疗本综述中包括的疾病状态的安全性和有效性。其中几项试验招募了老年人。结论有足够的数据支持在老年患者中使用较短的抗生素LOT。实施这一策略可以帮助药剂师和其他卫生保健专业人员优化老年人抗生素的使用。
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
Senior Care Pharmacist
Senior Care Pharmacist PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY-
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
160
期刊最新文献
Insulin Pen Administration Efficacy and Safety in an Older Patient. Management of Dry Mouth. Predictors of Use of Individual Insulin and GLP-1 RA Products Versus Fixed Ratio Insulin/GLP-1 RA Combinations in Medicare Beneficiaries. The Recalibration of Power: Republicans Take Control of the Senate and Key Health Care Committees. Adverse Drug Events and Medication Safety.
×
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