第二次抗生素剂量延迟与脓毒性休克患者死亡率的关系。

IF 3.2 3区 医学 Q2 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE Journal of critical care Pub Date : 2024-07-18 DOI:10.1016/j.jcrc.2024.154866
Zenalabdin H. Jabir PharmD, Travis S. Grey PharmD, BCPS, BCCCP, Angela R. Morelli PharmD, BCPS, BCIDP, Brandon D. Nornhold PharmD, Jestin N. Carlson MD, MS, MHA, Diane V. Thompson M.S, Animesh C. Gour MD
{"title":"第二次抗生素剂量延迟与脓毒性休克患者死亡率的关系。","authors":"Zenalabdin H. Jabir PharmD,&nbsp;Travis S. Grey PharmD, BCPS, BCCCP,&nbsp;Angela R. Morelli PharmD, BCPS, BCIDP,&nbsp;Brandon D. Nornhold PharmD,&nbsp;Jestin N. Carlson MD, MS, MHA,&nbsp;Diane V. Thompson M.S,&nbsp;Animesh C. Gour MD","doi":"10.1016/j.jcrc.2024.154866","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>Determine whether a delay in the administration of the second dose of antibiotics is associated with an increased risk of mortality for patients admitted with septic shock.</p></div><div><h3>Design</h3><p>Retrospective, observational evaluation.</p></div><div><h3>Setting</h3><p>Regional multicenter evaluation including four institutions in western Pennsylvania.</p></div><div><h3>Patients</h3><p>A total of 905 patients were included in this study who met the criteria for septic shock. Patients that did not receive a second dose of antibiotics, were transferred from an outside facility, or expected death within six hours of hospital admission were excluded.</p></div><div><h3>Interventions</h3><p>The frequency of second antibiotic dose administration delay was determined. A delay was defined as a delay greater than or equal to 25% of the antibiotic dosing interval.</p></div><div><h3>Measurements and main results</h3><p>A delay in second antibiotic dose administration was found in 181 (20%) of patients. Patients with a delay in the administration of second dose antibiotics had a higher mortality rate (35%) than patients without a delay (26%) (<em>p</em> =0.018). Patients with and without a delay in the administration of second-dose antibiotics had similar median 28-day vasopressor free days (median = 26.0, IQR = 2.0). Differences in the distribution of the 28-day vasopressor free days between groups resulted in the achievement of statistical significance (Mann-Whitney U = 57,294.5, z = −2.690, <em>p</em> = 0.006). There was no difference in 28-day ventilator-free days between groups. A delay in the administration of second dose antibiotics led to a longer in-hospital length of stay (9 days vs. 7 days; <em>p</em> = 0.022) and a longer ICU length of stay than patients without a delay (5 days vs. 3 days; <em>p</em> = 0.007).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Delays in second antibiotic dose administration in septic shock patients were present but lower than previous studies. These delays were associated with increased mortality, increased ICU and hospital length of stay.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":15451,"journal":{"name":"Journal of critical care","volume":"84 ","pages":"Article 154866"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0883944124003538/pdfft?md5=208b61c2418aae33e2a924e19172eed6&pid=1-s2.0-S0883944124003538-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Association of second antibiotic dose delays on mortality in patients with septic shock\",\"authors\":\"Zenalabdin H. Jabir PharmD,&nbsp;Travis S. Grey PharmD, BCPS, BCCCP,&nbsp;Angela R. Morelli PharmD, BCPS, BCIDP,&nbsp;Brandon D. Nornhold PharmD,&nbsp;Jestin N. Carlson MD, MS, MHA,&nbsp;Diane V. Thompson M.S,&nbsp;Animesh C. Gour MD\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jcrc.2024.154866\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>Determine whether a delay in the administration of the second dose of antibiotics is associated with an increased risk of mortality for patients admitted with septic shock.</p></div><div><h3>Design</h3><p>Retrospective, observational evaluation.</p></div><div><h3>Setting</h3><p>Regional multicenter evaluation including four institutions in western Pennsylvania.</p></div><div><h3>Patients</h3><p>A total of 905 patients were included in this study who met the criteria for septic shock. Patients that did not receive a second dose of antibiotics, were transferred from an outside facility, or expected death within six hours of hospital admission were excluded.</p></div><div><h3>Interventions</h3><p>The frequency of second antibiotic dose administration delay was determined. A delay was defined as a delay greater than or equal to 25% of the antibiotic dosing interval.</p></div><div><h3>Measurements and main results</h3><p>A delay in second antibiotic dose administration was found in 181 (20%) of patients. Patients with a delay in the administration of second dose antibiotics had a higher mortality rate (35%) than patients without a delay (26%) (<em>p</em> =0.018). Patients with and without a delay in the administration of second-dose antibiotics had similar median 28-day vasopressor free days (median = 26.0, IQR = 2.0). Differences in the distribution of the 28-day vasopressor free days between groups resulted in the achievement of statistical significance (Mann-Whitney U = 57,294.5, z = −2.690, <em>p</em> = 0.006). There was no difference in 28-day ventilator-free days between groups. A delay in the administration of second dose antibiotics led to a longer in-hospital length of stay (9 days vs. 7 days; <em>p</em> = 0.022) and a longer ICU length of stay than patients without a delay (5 days vs. 3 days; <em>p</em> = 0.007).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Delays in second antibiotic dose administration in septic shock patients were present but lower than previous studies. These delays were associated with increased mortality, increased ICU and hospital length of stay.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15451,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of critical care\",\"volume\":\"84 \",\"pages\":\"Article 154866\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0883944124003538/pdfft?md5=208b61c2418aae33e2a924e19172eed6&pid=1-s2.0-S0883944124003538-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of critical care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0883944124003538\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of critical care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0883944124003538","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:确定延迟使用第二剂抗生素是否会增加脓毒性休克患者的死亡风险:确定延迟使用第二剂抗生素是否会增加脓毒性休克患者的死亡风险:设计:回顾性观察评估:地区多中心评估,包括宾夕法尼亚州西部的四家机构:本研究共纳入 905 名符合脓毒性休克标准的患者。未接受第二剂抗生素治疗的患者、从外部机构转院的患者或预计在入院后六小时内死亡的患者被排除在外:干预措施:确定延迟使用第二剂抗生素的频率。干预措施:测定第二次抗生素给药延迟的频率,延迟时间大于或等于抗生素给药间隔时间的 25%:181例(20%)患者的第二次抗生素给药延迟。延迟使用第二剂抗生素的患者死亡率(35%)高于未延迟使用抗生素的患者(26%)(P =0.018)。延迟使用第二剂抗生素和未延迟使用第二剂抗生素的患者的 28 天无血管舒张剂天数中位数相似(中位数 = 26.0,IQR = 2.0)。各组间 28 天无血管舒张剂天数的分布差异具有统计学意义(Mann-Whitney U = 57,294.5, z = -2.690, p = 0.006)。组间 28 天无呼吸机天数无差异。与未延迟给药的患者相比,延迟给药的患者住院时间更长(9天 vs. 7天;p = 0.022),入住重症监护室的时间更长(5天 vs. 3天;p = 0.007):结论:脓毒性休克患者第二次使用抗生素的时间存在延迟,但低于以往的研究。这些延迟与死亡率增加、重症监护室和住院时间延长有关。
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
Association of second antibiotic dose delays on mortality in patients with septic shock

Objective

Determine whether a delay in the administration of the second dose of antibiotics is associated with an increased risk of mortality for patients admitted with septic shock.

Design

Retrospective, observational evaluation.

Setting

Regional multicenter evaluation including four institutions in western Pennsylvania.

Patients

A total of 905 patients were included in this study who met the criteria for septic shock. Patients that did not receive a second dose of antibiotics, were transferred from an outside facility, or expected death within six hours of hospital admission were excluded.

Interventions

The frequency of second antibiotic dose administration delay was determined. A delay was defined as a delay greater than or equal to 25% of the antibiotic dosing interval.

Measurements and main results

A delay in second antibiotic dose administration was found in 181 (20%) of patients. Patients with a delay in the administration of second dose antibiotics had a higher mortality rate (35%) than patients without a delay (26%) (p =0.018). Patients with and without a delay in the administration of second-dose antibiotics had similar median 28-day vasopressor free days (median = 26.0, IQR = 2.0). Differences in the distribution of the 28-day vasopressor free days between groups resulted in the achievement of statistical significance (Mann-Whitney U = 57,294.5, z = −2.690, p = 0.006). There was no difference in 28-day ventilator-free days between groups. A delay in the administration of second dose antibiotics led to a longer in-hospital length of stay (9 days vs. 7 days; p = 0.022) and a longer ICU length of stay than patients without a delay (5 days vs. 3 days; p = 0.007).

Conclusions

Delays in second antibiotic dose administration in septic shock patients were present but lower than previous studies. These delays were associated with increased mortality, increased ICU and hospital length of stay.

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
Journal of critical care
Journal of critical care 医学-危重病医学
CiteScore
8.60
自引率
2.70%
发文量
237
审稿时长
23 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Critical Care, the official publication of the World Federation of Societies of Intensive and Critical Care Medicine (WFSICCM), is a leading international, peer-reviewed journal providing original research, review articles, tutorials, and invited articles for physicians and allied health professionals involved in treating the critically ill. The Journal aims to improve patient care by furthering understanding of health systems research and its integration into clinical practice. The Journal will include articles which discuss: All aspects of health services research in critical care System based practice in anesthesiology, perioperative and critical care medicine The interface between anesthesiology, critical care medicine and pain Integrating intraoperative management in preparation for postoperative critical care management and recovery Optimizing patient management, i.e., exploring the interface between evidence-based principles or clinical insight into management and care of complex patients The team approach in the OR and ICU System-based research Medical ethics Technology in medicine Seminars discussing current, state of the art, and sometimes controversial topics in anesthesiology, critical care medicine, and professional education Residency Education.
期刊最新文献
Platelet dysfunction in heatstroke-induced coagulopathy: A retrospective observational study Challenges and opportunities in antibiotic allergy de-labeling in intensive care units: The time is now! Letter to the Editor: “Outcomes of continuous renal replacement therapy versus peritoneal dialysis as a renal replacement therapy modality in patients undergoing venoarterial 72 extracorporeal membrane oxygenation” Antibiotic allergy de-labeling in the intensive care unit: The prospective ADE-ICU study The interplay between organizational culture and burnout among ICU professionals: A cross-sectional multicenter study
×
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