首页> 外文期刊>The Lancet infectious diseases >Aggressive versus conservative initiation of antimicrobial treatment in critically ill surgical patients with suspected intensive-care-unit-acquired infection: A quasi-experimental, before and after observational cohort study
【24h】

Aggressive versus conservative initiation of antimicrobial treatment in critically ill surgical patients with suspected intensive-care-unit-acquired infection: A quasi-experimental, before and after observational cohort study

机译:在疑似重症监护室获得性感染的危重手术患者中,积极和保守地开始抗菌治疗:一项观察性队列研究前后的半实验性研究

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Background: Antimicrobial treatment in critically ill patients can either be started as soon as infection is suspected or after objective data confirm an infection. We postulated that delaying antimicrobial treatment of patients with suspected infections in the surgical intensive care unit (SICU) until objective evidence of infection had been obtained would not worsen patient mortality. Methods: We did a 2-year, quasi-experimental, before and after observational cohort study of patients aged 18 years or older who were admitted to the SICU of the University of Virginia (Charlottesville, VA, USA). From Sept 1, 2008, to Aug 31, 2009, aggressive treatment was used: patients suspected of having an infection on the basis of clinical grounds had blood cultures sent and antimicrobial treatment started. From Sept 1, 2009, to Aug 31, 2010, a conservative strategy was used, with antimicrobial treatment started only after objective findings confirmed an infection. Our primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Analyses were by intention to treat. Findings: Admissions to the SICU for the first and second years were 762 and 721, respectively, with 101 patients with SICU-acquired infections during the aggressive year and 100 patients during the conservative year. Compared with the aggressive approach, the conservative approach was associated with lower all-cause mortality (13/100 [13%] vs 27/101 [27%]; p=0·015), more initially appropriate therapy (158/214 [74%] vs 144/231 [62%]; p=0·0095), and a shorter mean duration of therapy (12·5 days [SD 10·7] vs 17·7 [28·1]; p=0·0080). After adjusting for age, sex, trauma involvement, acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE) II score, and site of infection, the odds ratio for the risk of mortality in the aggressive therapy group compared with the conservative therapy group was 2·5 (95% CI 1·5-4·0). Interpretation: Waiting for objective data to diagnose infection before treatment with antimicrobial drugs for suspected SICU-acquired infections does not worsen mortality and might be associated with better outcomes and use of antimicrobial drugs. Funding: National Institutes of Health.
机译:背景:疑似感染后或客观数据证实感染后,即可开始对重症患者进行抗菌治疗。我们假设在外科重症监护病房(SICU)中延迟对疑似感染患者的抗菌治疗直到获得感染的客观证据不会使患者的病情恶化。方法:我们对观察组进行了为期2年的准实验,前后观察性研究了18岁或18岁以上的弗吉尼亚大学SICU(美国弗吉尼亚州夏洛特维尔市)的患者。从2008年9月1日到2009年8月31日,采用积极治疗:根据临床理由怀疑患有感染的患者接受了血液培养,并开始了抗菌治疗。从2009年9月1日到2010年8月31日,我们采用了保守的策略,只有在客观发现证实感染后才开始进行抗菌治疗。我们的主要结局是院内死亡率。分析是按意向进行的。调查结果:在第一年和第二年,SICU的入院率分别为762和721,在积极的一年中有101例SICU获得性感染患者,在保守的一年中有100例患者。与积极治疗相比,保守治疗的全因死亡率较低(13/100 [13%]比27/101 [27%]; p = 0·015),更适合早期使用的治疗方法(158/214 [13] 74%] vs 144/231 [62%]; p = 0·0095),平均疗程更短(12·5天[SD 10·7] vs 17·7 [28·1]; p = 0 ·0080)。在对年龄,性别,创伤受累,急性生理和慢性健康评估(APACHE)II分数以及感染部位进行调整后,积极治疗组与保守治疗组相比,死亡风险的比值比为2·5 (95%CI 1·5-4·0)。解释:等待客观数据以诊断感染,然后再对疑似SICU感染的患者进行抗菌药物治疗,不会使死亡率恶化,并且可能与更好的结局和使用抗菌药物有关。资金来源:国立卫生研究院。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
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