Jonathan Ross Mallen, Davis M Aasen, Jackson Ross Vuncannon, Chia-Ling Kuo, Jinjian Mu, Belachew Tessema, Seth M Brown
{"title":"鼻科医生使用抗生素与鼻填充物治疗鼻出血。","authors":"Jonathan Ross Mallen, Davis M Aasen, Jackson Ross Vuncannon, Chia-Ling Kuo, Jinjian Mu, Belachew Tessema, Seth M Brown","doi":"10.1177/19458924231176394","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There is limited evidence supporting the usage of prophylactic antibiotics in the setting of nasal packing for epistaxis. It is unclear what current antiobiotic usage patterns are by otolaryngologists.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Characterize the antibiotic prescribing practices employed by otolaryngologists in the management of epistaxis patients treated with packing as well as the underlying rationale. Explore the impact of experience, geography, and academic affiliation on treatment decisions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An anonymous survey of antibiotic prescribing patterns for patients with epistaxis requiring nasal packing was distributed to all physician members of the American Rhinologic Society. Responses to each question were descriptively summarized including 95% confidence intervals and were linked to demographics using Fisher's exact tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>One thousand one hundred and thirteen surveys were distributed with 307 responses (27.6%). Antibiotic prescription rates varied based on packing type, with 20.0% prescribing antibiotics for dissolvable packing compared to 84.2% to 84.6% for nondissolvable packing. The absorbance of nondissolvable packing does not impact the decision to prescribe antibiotics (<i>P</i> > .999). Precisely 69.7% (95% CI: 64.0%-74.8%) stop antibiotics immediately following packing removal. Precisely 85.6% (95% CI: 81.6%-89.9%) cite the risk of toxic shock syndrome (TSS) when prescribing antibiotics. Notable regional differences include greater utilization of amoxicillin-clavulanate in the Midwest (67.6%) and Northeast (61.4%) as compared with the South (42.1%) and West (45.1%) (<i>P</i> = .013). Further, years in practice were positively associated with several patterns including prescribing antibiotics for patients with dissolvable packing (<i>P</i> = .008), citing prevention of sinusitis as a rationale for antibiotic use (<i>P</i> < .001), and a higher likelihood of having treated a patient with TSS (<i>P</i> = .002).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Antibiotic use in patients with epistaxis controlled with nondissolvable packing is common. Treatment patterns are influenced by geography, years in practice, and practice type.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>4.</p>","PeriodicalId":7650,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Rhinology & Allergy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Rhinologist Use of Antibiotics With Nasal Packing for Epistaxis.\",\"authors\":\"Jonathan Ross Mallen, Davis M Aasen, Jackson Ross Vuncannon, Chia-Ling Kuo, Jinjian Mu, Belachew Tessema, Seth M Brown\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/19458924231176394\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There is limited evidence supporting the usage of prophylactic antibiotics in the setting of nasal packing for epistaxis. It is unclear what current antiobiotic usage patterns are by otolaryngologists.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Characterize the antibiotic prescribing practices employed by otolaryngologists in the management of epistaxis patients treated with packing as well as the underlying rationale. Explore the impact of experience, geography, and academic affiliation on treatment decisions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An anonymous survey of antibiotic prescribing patterns for patients with epistaxis requiring nasal packing was distributed to all physician members of the American Rhinologic Society. Responses to each question were descriptively summarized including 95% confidence intervals and were linked to demographics using Fisher's exact tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>One thousand one hundred and thirteen surveys were distributed with 307 responses (27.6%). Antibiotic prescription rates varied based on packing type, with 20.0% prescribing antibiotics for dissolvable packing compared to 84.2% to 84.6% for nondissolvable packing. The absorbance of nondissolvable packing does not impact the decision to prescribe antibiotics (<i>P</i> > .999). Precisely 69.7% (95% CI: 64.0%-74.8%) stop antibiotics immediately following packing removal. Precisely 85.6% (95% CI: 81.6%-89.9%) cite the risk of toxic shock syndrome (TSS) when prescribing antibiotics. Notable regional differences include greater utilization of amoxicillin-clavulanate in the Midwest (67.6%) and Northeast (61.4%) as compared with the South (42.1%) and West (45.1%) (<i>P</i> = .013). Further, years in practice were positively associated with several patterns including prescribing antibiotics for patients with dissolvable packing (<i>P</i> = .008), citing prevention of sinusitis as a rationale for antibiotic use (<i>P</i> < .001), and a higher likelihood of having treated a patient with TSS (<i>P</i> = .002).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Antibiotic use in patients with epistaxis controlled with nondissolvable packing is common. Treatment patterns are influenced by geography, years in practice, and practice type.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>4.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7650,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Journal of Rhinology & Allergy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Journal of Rhinology & Allergy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/19458924231176394\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Rhinology & Allergy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/19458924231176394","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Rhinologist Use of Antibiotics With Nasal Packing for Epistaxis.
Background: There is limited evidence supporting the usage of prophylactic antibiotics in the setting of nasal packing for epistaxis. It is unclear what current antiobiotic usage patterns are by otolaryngologists.
Objectives: Characterize the antibiotic prescribing practices employed by otolaryngologists in the management of epistaxis patients treated with packing as well as the underlying rationale. Explore the impact of experience, geography, and academic affiliation on treatment decisions.
Methods: An anonymous survey of antibiotic prescribing patterns for patients with epistaxis requiring nasal packing was distributed to all physician members of the American Rhinologic Society. Responses to each question were descriptively summarized including 95% confidence intervals and were linked to demographics using Fisher's exact tests.
Results: One thousand one hundred and thirteen surveys were distributed with 307 responses (27.6%). Antibiotic prescription rates varied based on packing type, with 20.0% prescribing antibiotics for dissolvable packing compared to 84.2% to 84.6% for nondissolvable packing. The absorbance of nondissolvable packing does not impact the decision to prescribe antibiotics (P > .999). Precisely 69.7% (95% CI: 64.0%-74.8%) stop antibiotics immediately following packing removal. Precisely 85.6% (95% CI: 81.6%-89.9%) cite the risk of toxic shock syndrome (TSS) when prescribing antibiotics. Notable regional differences include greater utilization of amoxicillin-clavulanate in the Midwest (67.6%) and Northeast (61.4%) as compared with the South (42.1%) and West (45.1%) (P = .013). Further, years in practice were positively associated with several patterns including prescribing antibiotics for patients with dissolvable packing (P = .008), citing prevention of sinusitis as a rationale for antibiotic use (P < .001), and a higher likelihood of having treated a patient with TSS (P = .002).
Conclusions: Antibiotic use in patients with epistaxis controlled with nondissolvable packing is common. Treatment patterns are influenced by geography, years in practice, and practice type.
期刊介绍：
The American Journal of Rhinology & Allergy is a peer-reviewed, scientific publication committed to expanding knowledge and publishing the best clinical and basic research within the fields of Rhinology & Allergy. Its focus is to publish information which contributes to improved quality of care for patients with nasal and sinus disorders. Its primary readership consists of otolaryngologists, allergists, and plastic surgeons. Published material includes peer-reviewed original research, clinical trials, and review articles.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
