首页> 外文期刊>International journal of infectious diseases : >Evaluation of the decision support system for antimicrobial treatment, TREAT, in an acute medical ward of a university hospital
【24h】

Evaluation of the decision support system for antimicrobial treatment, TREAT, in an acute medical ward of a university hospital

机译:在大学医院的急性病房中评估抗菌治疗决策支持系统TREAT

获取原文
           

摘要

Objectives: TREAT, a decision support system for antimicrobial therapy, was implemented in an acute medical ward. Methods: Patients admitted on suspicion of infection were included in the study. The evaluation of TREAT was done both retrospectively and prospectively. Coverage of empirical antimicrobial treatments was compared to recommendations from TREAT and the optimal use of local guidelines. Results: Five hundred and eleven patients were included, of whom 162 had a microbiologically documented infection. In the retrospective part of the study, TREAT, physician, and guideline antimicrobial coverage rates were 65%, 51%, and 79%, respectively, and in the prospective part, 68%, 62%, and 77%, respectively. TREAT provided lower coverage than local guidelines (p<0.001), but was similar to the performance of physicians in a university hospital (p=0.069). No differences were found in length of hospital stay, or hospital or 30-day mortality. Direct costs were significantly higher for TREAT advice than for local guidelines or the physician prescriptions (p<0.001), but the ecological costs were lower for TREAT advice than for both local guidelines (p<0.001) and physician prescriptions (p=0.247). The coverage of TREAT advice for the bacteraemia patients was non-inferior to the physicians (p=1.00). Conclusions: TREAT can potentially improve the ecological costs of empirical antimicrobial therapy for patients in acute medical wards, but provided lower coverage than local guidelines.
机译:目标:TREAT,一种抗微生物治疗的决策支持系统,已在急诊病房实施。方法:本研究纳入因怀疑感染而入院的患者。回顾性和前瞻性地评估了TREAT。将经验性抗菌治疗的覆盖率与TREAT的建议和当地指南的最佳使用进行了比较。结果:包括511位患者,其中162位有微生物学记录的感染。在研究的回顾性部分中,TREAT,医师和指南的抗菌药物覆盖率分别为65%,51%和79%,而在前瞻性部分中,分别为68%,62%和77%。 TREAT的覆盖率低于当地指南(p <0.001),但与大学医院医师的表现相似(p = 0.069)。住院时间,住院时间或30天死亡率无差异。 TREAT建议的直接成本明显高于当地指南或医师处方(p <0.001),但TREAT建议的生态成本低于地方指南(p <0.001)和医师处方(p = 0.247)。对于菌血症患者,TREAT建议的覆盖范围不亚于医生(p = 1.00)。结论:TREAT可以潜在地提高急性病房患者经验性抗菌治疗的生态成本,但覆盖率低于当地指南。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号