"再来一次,有感觉":在美国一家医疗中心的倾向得分匹配队列中,骨科感染患者出院时口服抗生素与静脉注射抗生素的疗效无差异。

Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE Pub Date : 2024-04-29 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1017/ash.2024.57
Julie Gray, Russell J Benefield, Chanah K Gallagher, Heather Cummins, Laura K Certain
{"title":"\"再来一次,有感觉\":在美国一家医疗中心的倾向得分匹配队列中,骨科感染患者出院时口服抗生素与静脉注射抗生素的疗效无差异。","authors":"Julie Gray, Russell J Benefield, Chanah K Gallagher, Heather Cummins, Laura K Certain","doi":"10.1017/ash.2024.57","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare outcomes between patients discharged on intravenous (IV) versus oral (PO) antibiotics for the treatment of orthopedic infections, after creation of an IV-to-PO guideline, at a single academic medical center in the United States.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a retrospective, propensity score matched, cohort study of adult patients hospitalized for orthopedic infections from September 30, 2020, to April 30, 2022. Patients discharged on PO antibiotics were matched to patients discharged on IV antibiotics. The primary outcome was one-year treatment failure following discharge. Secondary outcomes were incidence of 60-day treatment failure, adverse drug events (ADE), readmissions, infectious disease clinic \"no-show\" rates, and emergency department (ED) encounters.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ninety PO-treated patients were matched to 90 IV-treated patients. Baseline characteristics were similar in the two groups after matching. There was no significant difference in the proportions of patients on PO versus IV antibiotics experiencing treatment failure at one year (26% vs 31%, <i>P</i> = .47). There were no significant differences for any secondary outcomes: treatment failure within 60 days (13% vs 14%, <i>P</i> = 1.00), ADE (13% vs 11%, <i>P</i> = .82), unplanned readmission (17% vs 21%, <i>P</i> = .57), or ED encounters (9% vs 18%, <i>P</i> = .54). Survival analyses identified no significant differences in time-to-event between PO and IV treatment for any of the outcomes assessed.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There were no appreciable differences in outcomes between patients discharged on PO compared to IV regimens. Antimicrobial stewardship interventions to increase prescribing of PO antibiotics for the treatment of orthopedic infections should be encouraged.</p>","PeriodicalId":72246,"journal":{"name":"Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11062794/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"\\\"Once more, with feeling\\\": no difference in outcomes between patients discharged on oral versus intravenous antibiotics for orthopedic infections in a propensity score matched cohort at a US medical center.\",\"authors\":\"Julie Gray, Russell J Benefield, Chanah K Gallagher, Heather Cummins, Laura K Certain\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/ash.2024.57\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare outcomes between patients discharged on intravenous (IV) versus oral (PO) antibiotics for the treatment of orthopedic infections, after creation of an IV-to-PO guideline, at a single academic medical center in the United States.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a retrospective, propensity score matched, cohort study of adult patients hospitalized for orthopedic infections from September 30, 2020, to April 30, 2022. Patients discharged on PO antibiotics were matched to patients discharged on IV antibiotics. The primary outcome was one-year treatment failure following discharge. Secondary outcomes were incidence of 60-day treatment failure, adverse drug events (ADE), readmissions, infectious disease clinic \\\"no-show\\\" rates, and emergency department (ED) encounters.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ninety PO-treated patients were matched to 90 IV-treated patients. Baseline characteristics were similar in the two groups after matching. There was no significant difference in the proportions of patients on PO versus IV antibiotics experiencing treatment failure at one year (26% vs 31%, <i>P</i> = .47). There were no significant differences for any secondary outcomes: treatment failure within 60 days (13% vs 14%, <i>P</i> = 1.00), ADE (13% vs 11%, <i>P</i> = .82), unplanned readmission (17% vs 21%, <i>P</i> = .57), or ED encounters (9% vs 18%, <i>P</i> = .54). Survival analyses identified no significant differences in time-to-event between PO and IV treatment for any of the outcomes assessed.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There were no appreciable differences in outcomes between patients discharged on PO compared to IV regimens. Antimicrobial stewardship interventions to increase prescribing of PO antibiotics for the treatment of orthopedic infections should be encouraged.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72246,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11062794/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/ash.2024.57\",\"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}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ash.2024.57","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

摘要

目的:比较一家学术医疗中心在制定静脉注射转口服抗生素指南后,采用静脉注射与口服抗生素治疗骨科感染的患者的疗效:比较美国一家学术医疗中心在制定静脉注射转口服抗生素指南后,使用静脉注射抗生素和口服抗生素治疗骨科感染的患者出院后的治疗效果:这是一项倾向得分匹配的回顾性队列研究,研究对象是 2020 年 9 月 30 日至 2022 年 4 月 30 日期间因骨科感染住院的成年患者。使用 PO 抗生素出院的患者与使用 IV 抗生素出院的患者相匹配。主要结果是出院后一年的治疗失败率。次要结果为 60 天治疗失败发生率、药物不良事件 (ADE)、再入院率、传染病诊所 "未就诊 "率和急诊科就诊率:90名接受过口服药物治疗的患者与90名接受过静脉注射治疗的患者进行了配对。配对后,两组患者的基线特征相似。使用 PO 抗生素和 IV 抗生素的患者在一年后治疗失败的比例没有明显差异(26% vs 31%,P = .47)。在以下次要结果中也无明显差异:60 天内治疗失败(13% vs 14%,P = 1.00)、ADE(13% vs 11%,P = .82)、非计划再入院(17% vs 21%,P = .57)或急诊就诊(9% vs 18%,P = .54)。生存分析表明,在任何一项评估结果中,口服和静脉注射治疗的事件发生时间均无显著差异:结论:与静脉注射疗法相比,采用口服药物出院的患者在治疗效果上没有明显差异。应鼓励采取抗菌药物管理干预措施,增加处方口服抗生素治疗骨科感染。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
"Once more, with feeling": no difference in outcomes between patients discharged on oral versus intravenous antibiotics for orthopedic infections in a propensity score matched cohort at a US medical center.

Objective: To compare outcomes between patients discharged on intravenous (IV) versus oral (PO) antibiotics for the treatment of orthopedic infections, after creation of an IV-to-PO guideline, at a single academic medical center in the United States.

Methods: This was a retrospective, propensity score matched, cohort study of adult patients hospitalized for orthopedic infections from September 30, 2020, to April 30, 2022. Patients discharged on PO antibiotics were matched to patients discharged on IV antibiotics. The primary outcome was one-year treatment failure following discharge. Secondary outcomes were incidence of 60-day treatment failure, adverse drug events (ADE), readmissions, infectious disease clinic "no-show" rates, and emergency department (ED) encounters.

Results: Ninety PO-treated patients were matched to 90 IV-treated patients. Baseline characteristics were similar in the two groups after matching. There was no significant difference in the proportions of patients on PO versus IV antibiotics experiencing treatment failure at one year (26% vs 31%, P = .47). There were no significant differences for any secondary outcomes: treatment failure within 60 days (13% vs 14%, P = 1.00), ADE (13% vs 11%, P = .82), unplanned readmission (17% vs 21%, P = .57), or ED encounters (9% vs 18%, P = .54). Survival analyses identified no significant differences in time-to-event between PO and IV treatment for any of the outcomes assessed.

Conclusions: There were no appreciable differences in outcomes between patients discharged on PO compared to IV regimens. Antimicrobial stewardship interventions to increase prescribing of PO antibiotics for the treatment of orthopedic infections should be encouraged.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 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