Prophylactic Antibiotics for Uncomplicated Upper-Extremity Lacerations: A Retrospective Cohort Study of Private Insurance Claims

IF 2.1 2区 医学 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS Journal of Hand Surgery-American Volume Pub Date : 2025-05-01 Epub Date: 2025-03-08 DOI:10.1016/j.jhsa.2025.01.030
Cecil S. Qiu MD , Gabriel Yohe MS , Eliana Schaefer MD , Gongliang Zhang PhD, MS , Oluseyi Aliu MD, MS , Aviram M. Giladi MD, MS
{"title":"Prophylactic Antibiotics for Uncomplicated Upper-Extremity Lacerations: A Retrospective Cohort Study of Private Insurance Claims","authors":"Cecil S. Qiu MD ,&nbsp;Gabriel Yohe MS ,&nbsp;Eliana Schaefer MD ,&nbsp;Gongliang Zhang PhD, MS ,&nbsp;Oluseyi Aliu MD, MS ,&nbsp;Aviram M. Giladi MD, MS","doi":"10.1016/j.jhsa.2025.01.030","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>Despite limited evidence for their effectiveness, antibiotics are frequently prescribed after uncomplicated upper-extremity lacerations. We analyzed rates of prophylactic antibiotic prescriptions and risk factors for infection after upper-extremity lacerations that were acutely repaired in emergency departments (ED).</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Using the IBM MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters database, we conducted a retrospective cohort study of adult patients with uncomplicated upper-extremity lacerations repaired in the ED between 2010 and 2020. In addition to univariate analyses, multivariable models were used to predict the likelihood of antibiotic prescriptions and to assess their independent relationship to infections.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>We identified 249,261 patients with upper-extremity lacerations repaired in the ED. Of these, 147,964 lacerations (59.4%) were shorter than 2.5 cm, and 224,581 (90.1%) were coded as simple repairs. Prophylactic antibiotics were given to 49,609 (19.9%). Overall, the 30-day infection rate was 2.1%. Individuals who underwent complex repair were more likely to fill antibiotic prescriptions compared with those undergoing simple repair (40.2% vs 18.2%), but no clinically meaningful difference in subsequent infections was observed (1.9% vs 2.0%). We performed a least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression that predicted antibiotic prescriptions with moderate discrimination (area under the curve = 0.67). A propensity-score balanced logistic regression found that antibiotics were independently associated with greater odds of infection (odds ratio = 1.31, 95% confidence interval: 1.23–1.41).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Infections after acute repairs of upper-extremity lacerations were rare. One in five patients received prophylactic antibiotics, a lower prescribing rate than previously reported. Receiving antibiotics was associated with an increased odds of infection after controlling for multiple demographic and clinical variables, but a causal relationship cannot be established from these data. We did not find evidence that supports routine use of prophylactic antibiotics to prevent infections in uncomplicated upper-extremity lacerations.</div></div><div><h3>Type of study/level of evidence</h3><div>Therapy/Prevention IIb.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":54815,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Hand Surgery-American Volume","volume":"50 5","pages":"Pages 525-533"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Hand Surgery-American Volume","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0363502325000681","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

Despite limited evidence for their effectiveness, antibiotics are frequently prescribed after uncomplicated upper-extremity lacerations. We analyzed rates of prophylactic antibiotic prescriptions and risk factors for infection after upper-extremity lacerations that were acutely repaired in emergency departments (ED).

Methods

Using the IBM MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters database, we conducted a retrospective cohort study of adult patients with uncomplicated upper-extremity lacerations repaired in the ED between 2010 and 2020. In addition to univariate analyses, multivariable models were used to predict the likelihood of antibiotic prescriptions and to assess their independent relationship to infections.

Results

We identified 249,261 patients with upper-extremity lacerations repaired in the ED. Of these, 147,964 lacerations (59.4%) were shorter than 2.5 cm, and 224,581 (90.1%) were coded as simple repairs. Prophylactic antibiotics were given to 49,609 (19.9%). Overall, the 30-day infection rate was 2.1%. Individuals who underwent complex repair were more likely to fill antibiotic prescriptions compared with those undergoing simple repair (40.2% vs 18.2%), but no clinically meaningful difference in subsequent infections was observed (1.9% vs 2.0%). We performed a least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression that predicted antibiotic prescriptions with moderate discrimination (area under the curve = 0.67). A propensity-score balanced logistic regression found that antibiotics were independently associated with greater odds of infection (odds ratio = 1.31, 95% confidence interval: 1.23–1.41).

Conclusions

Infections after acute repairs of upper-extremity lacerations were rare. One in five patients received prophylactic antibiotics, a lower prescribing rate than previously reported. Receiving antibiotics was associated with an increased odds of infection after controlling for multiple demographic and clinical variables, but a causal relationship cannot be established from these data. We did not find evidence that supports routine use of prophylactic antibiotics to prevent infections in uncomplicated upper-extremity lacerations.

Type of study/level of evidence

Therapy/Prevention IIb.
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
预防性抗生素用于无并发症的上肢撕裂伤:私人保险索赔的回顾性队列研究。
目的:尽管证据有限,抗生素的有效性,经常开处方后,无并发症的上肢撕裂伤。我们分析了在急诊科(ED)急性修复上肢撕裂伤后预防性抗生素处方的比例和感染的危险因素。方法:使用IBM MarketScan商业索赔和遭遇数据库,我们对2010年至2020年间在急诊科修复的无并发症上肢撕裂伤的成年患者进行了回顾性队列研究。除了单变量分析外,还使用多变量模型来预测抗生素处方的可能性,并评估其与感染的独立关系。结果:我们确定了249261例在急诊科修复的上肢撕裂伤患者。其中,147964例(59.4%)撕裂伤短于2.5 cm, 224581例(90.1%)被编码为简单修复。预防性使用抗生素49609例(19.9%)。总体而言,30天感染率为2.1%。与接受简单修复的个体相比,接受复杂修复的个体更有可能填写抗生素处方(40.2%对18.2%),但随后的感染没有临床意义的差异(1.9%对2.0%)。我们进行了最小的绝对收缩和选择算子回归,预测抗生素处方具有中等歧视(曲线下面积= 0.67)。倾向-得分平衡逻辑回归发现抗生素与感染几率较高独立相关(优势比= 1.31,95%置信区间:1.23-1.41)。结论:上肢撕裂伤急性修复后感染少见。五分之一的患者接受预防性抗生素治疗,处方率低于先前报道。在控制了多种人口统计学和临床变量后,接受抗生素与感染几率增加有关,但不能从这些数据中建立因果关系。我们没有发现证据支持常规使用预防性抗生素来预防无并发症的上肢撕裂伤感染。研究类型/证据水平:治疗/预防。
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
3.20
自引率
10.50%
发文量
402
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Hand Surgery publishes original, peer-reviewed articles related to the pathophysiology, diagnosis, and treatment of diseases and conditions of the upper extremity; these include both clinical and basic science studies, along with case reports. Special features include Review Articles (including Current Concepts and The Hand Surgery Landscape), Reviews of Books and Media, and Letters to the Editor.
期刊最新文献
Carpal Tunnel Release Surgical Techniques. Interobserver Reliability of the Trampoline Test, Hook Test, and Suction Test in Arthroscopic Assessment of Triangular Fibrocartilage Complex Lesions. Inside-out Volar Portal of Arthroscopy of Proximal Interphalangeal Joints: A Cadaver Study. Comparative Cost Analysis of Surgery Versus Neurotoxin Injection for Long-Term Management of Upper-Extremity Spasticity. Functional and Histological Outcomes After Polyethylene Glycol Fusion of Rat Sciatic Nerve Transection.
×
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:604180095
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