脓毒症患者抗菌剂的依从性和死亡率

Fidsa Jamal Ahmad Wadi Al Ramahi, Omran Abu Khalaf, Lamya Abu Shanab, Mohammad Obaidat Pharm, M. Hasan, M. Mhanna, Maha Hashim Abdulghani
{"title":"脓毒症患者抗菌剂的依从性和死亡率","authors":"Fidsa Jamal Ahmad Wadi Al Ramahi, Omran Abu Khalaf, Lamya Abu Shanab, Mohammad Obaidat Pharm, M. Hasan, M. Mhanna, Maha Hashim Abdulghani","doi":"10.3823/836","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background \nTo compare the recent de-escalations rates with a six-year earlier study, and mortality associated with de-escalation. \nMethods \nSettings \nA prospective multicenter study including septic patients, all were on broad-spectrum antimicrobials (BSA). Excluded from the study patients on antimicrobial prophylaxis, and patients without a microbiological diagnosis, or bacteria were solely BSA-susceptible. The study team made recommendations for antimicrobials de-escalation to the treating physician(s) must an opportunity loomed. \nResults \n182 patients were available for analysis. De-escalation was achieved in 43 (24%) patients. The clinical diagnoses, comorbidities, commonly used antimicrobials, the microbiological diagnoses were not different between the two groups (patients with and without de-escalation). Logistic regression analysis showed no correlation between bacterial species and de-escalation (Nagelkerke R2 = 0.076). Relapsing sepsis and reinfection were not different (P > 0.05). The in-hospital mortality rates for the de-escalated patients were lower (P = 0.015), not on day 30 (P = 0.354). The length of the ICU stay and ward stay were not different (P >0.05), but more de-escalated patients were discharged home from the ICU (P = 0.034), however, patients without de-escalation were discharged more from the ward (P = 0.002). \n   Conclusion \nDe-escalation rates increased within six years from 6.7% - 24% (P = 0.000), with added benefits of shorter ICU stay and less in-hospital mortality","PeriodicalId":22518,"journal":{"name":"The International Arabic Journal of Antimicrobial Agents","volume":"24 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Compliance with antimicrobials de-escalation in septic patients and mortality rates\",\"authors\":\"Fidsa Jamal Ahmad Wadi Al Ramahi, Omran Abu Khalaf, Lamya Abu Shanab, Mohammad Obaidat Pharm, M. Hasan, M. Mhanna, Maha Hashim Abdulghani\",\"doi\":\"10.3823/836\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background \\nTo compare the recent de-escalations rates with a six-year earlier study, and mortality associated with de-escalation. \\nMethods \\nSettings \\nA prospective multicenter study including septic patients, all were on broad-spectrum antimicrobials (BSA). Excluded from the study patients on antimicrobial prophylaxis, and patients without a microbiological diagnosis, or bacteria were solely BSA-susceptible. The study team made recommendations for antimicrobials de-escalation to the treating physician(s) must an opportunity loomed. \\nResults \\n182 patients were available for analysis. De-escalation was achieved in 43 (24%) patients. The clinical diagnoses, comorbidities, commonly used antimicrobials, the microbiological diagnoses were not different between the two groups (patients with and without de-escalation). Logistic regression analysis showed no correlation between bacterial species and de-escalation (Nagelkerke R2 = 0.076). Relapsing sepsis and reinfection were not different (P > 0.05). The in-hospital mortality rates for the de-escalated patients were lower (P = 0.015), not on day 30 (P = 0.354). The length of the ICU stay and ward stay were not different (P >0.05), but more de-escalated patients were discharged home from the ICU (P = 0.034), however, patients without de-escalation were discharged more from the ward (P = 0.002). \\n   Conclusion \\nDe-escalation rates increased within six years from 6.7% - 24% (P = 0.000), with added benefits of shorter ICU stay and less in-hospital mortality\",\"PeriodicalId\":22518,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The International Arabic Journal of Antimicrobial Agents\",\"volume\":\"24 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-09-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The International Arabic Journal of Antimicrobial Agents\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3823/836\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The International Arabic Journal of Antimicrobial Agents","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3823/836","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:比较最近的降级率与六年前的研究,以及与降级相关的死亡率。方法设置一项前瞻性多中心研究,包括脓毒症患者,所有患者均使用广谱抗菌药物(BSA)。排除在研究之外的抗菌素预防患者,以及没有微生物学诊断或细菌的患者仅对bsa敏感。研究小组向治疗医生提出了减少抗菌素剂量的建议,如果有机会的话。结果182例可供分析。43例(24%)患者达到缓解。两组患者的临床诊断、合并症、常用抗菌剂、微生物学诊断无差异(有无降级)。Logistic回归分析显示细菌种类与病情恶化无相关性(Nagelkerke R2 = 0.076)。复发性败血症和再感染两组无显著性差异(P > 0.05)。降级患者的住院死亡率较低(P = 0.015),而第30天的住院死亡率较低(P = 0.354)。ICU住院时间与病房住院时间差异无统计学意义(P >0.05),但降级患者出院率较高(P = 0.034),未降级患者出院率较高(P = 0.002)。结论6年内病情降级率从6.7%上升至24% (P = 0.000),缩短ICU住院时间和降低住院死亡率也有额外的好处
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
Compliance with antimicrobials de-escalation in septic patients and mortality rates
Background To compare the recent de-escalations rates with a six-year earlier study, and mortality associated with de-escalation. Methods Settings A prospective multicenter study including septic patients, all were on broad-spectrum antimicrobials (BSA). Excluded from the study patients on antimicrobial prophylaxis, and patients without a microbiological diagnosis, or bacteria were solely BSA-susceptible. The study team made recommendations for antimicrobials de-escalation to the treating physician(s) must an opportunity loomed. Results 182 patients were available for analysis. De-escalation was achieved in 43 (24%) patients. The clinical diagnoses, comorbidities, commonly used antimicrobials, the microbiological diagnoses were not different between the two groups (patients with and without de-escalation). Logistic regression analysis showed no correlation between bacterial species and de-escalation (Nagelkerke R2 = 0.076). Relapsing sepsis and reinfection were not different (P > 0.05). The in-hospital mortality rates for the de-escalated patients were lower (P = 0.015), not on day 30 (P = 0.354). The length of the ICU stay and ward stay were not different (P >0.05), but more de-escalated patients were discharged home from the ICU (P = 0.034), however, patients without de-escalation were discharged more from the ward (P = 0.002).    Conclusion De-escalation rates increased within six years from 6.7% - 24% (P = 0.000), with added benefits of shorter ICU stay and less in-hospital mortality
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Antibiogram of bacterial isolates from clinical specimens during 2018-2020 at Al-Aqsa hospital, Gaza, Palestine Impact Of COVID-19 Pandemic On The Pattern Of Azithromycin Prescribing; A Review Antimicrobial Susceptibility Pattern and Virulence Genes Detection in Citrobacter freundii Isolated from Patients of a Tertiary Care Hospital, Bangladesh Co-infection in patients with COVID-19 in Tripoli Northern Lebanon: germs involved and antibiotic sensitivity profile. Carbapenemase typing and resistance profile of Enterobacteriaceae with reduced sensitivity to carbapenems in a Middle Eastern tertiary care center
×
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