Impact of antibiotic allergy labels on timely and appropriate antibiotics for sepsis in the emergency department
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER:
PROVIDER: S-EPMC10712711 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Dec
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundLittle is known about determinants of appropriate antibiotic use in the emergency department (ED). We measured appropriateness of antibiotic use for seven quality indicators (QIs) and studied patient-related factors that determine their variation.Patients and methodsA retrospective analysis of 948 patients presumptively diagnosed as having an infection needing empirical antibiotic treatment in the ED was performed. Outcomes of seven previously validated QIs were calculated using computerized algorithms. We used logistic regression analysis to identify patient-related factors of QI performance and evaluated whether more appropriate antibiotic use in the ED results in better patient outcomes (length-of-stay, in-hospital mortality, 30 day readmission).ResultsQI performance ranged from 57.3% for guideline-adherent empirical therapy to 97.3% for appropriate route of administration in patients with sepsis. QI performance was positively associated with patients' disease severity on admission (presence of fever, tachycardia and hypotension). Overall, the clinical diagnosis and thus the guidelines followed influenced QI performance. The difference in complexity between the guidelines was a possible explanation for the variation in QI performance. A QI performance sum score of 100% was associated with reduced in-hospital mortality. QI performance was not associated with readmission rates.ConclusionsWe gained insights into factors that determine quality of antibiotic prescription in the ED. Adherence to the full bundle of QIs was associated with reduced in-hospital mortality. These findings suggest that future stewardship interventions in the ED should focus on the entire process of antibiotic prescribing in the ED and not on a single metric only.
| S-EPMC8210121 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAppropriate antibiotics prescribing is key to treatment and to preventing mortality in patients with sepsis. The aim of this study was to determine the effect of the appropriate timing, spectrum, and dose of antibiotics on 28-day mortality in patients with sepsis.MethodsWe performed a retrospective cohort observational study. We enrolled patients with sepsis in the emergency department of a tertiary care hospital between 1 March and 31 July 2019. Patients were coded into an appropriate antibiotics group (time, spectrum, dose) and an inappropriate antibiotics group. We collected information of patient characteristics, comorbidities, vital signs, laboratory test results, and initial treatment. We followed patient outcomes, 28-day mortality, hospital deaths, 28-day ventilator-free days, and 28-day hospital-free days.ResultsA total of 593 patients were enrolled, with 323 (54.46%) in the appropriate antibiotics group. We used multivariate logistic analyses to assess factors for mortality. Primary outcomes of appropriate antibiotics (administration within 60 min of triage, appropriate spectrum and dose) did not affect 28-day mortality (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.57; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.22-1.144; P=0.23). Subgroup analysis showed that appropriate spectrum alone influenced 28-day mortality (adjusted OR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.15-0.99; P=0.047). Appropriate antibiotics was not associated with in-hospital mortality (adjusted OR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.29-1.30; P=0.21).ConclusionAppropriate antibiotics included timing less than 60 min, spectrum and the dose was not significantly affected in 28-day mortality in emergency sepsis patients.Trial registrationThe trial was retrospectively registered in the Thai Clinical Trial Registry, identification number TCTR20211216003 .
| S-EPMC8943924 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Around 42,000 children suffer from severe sepsis each year in the US alone, resulting in significant morbidity, mortality and billion dollar expenditures in the US healthcare system. Sepsis recognition is a clinical challenge in children. Biomarkers are needed to tailor appropriate antimicrobial therapies and improve risk stratification. The goal of this study was to determine if gene expression profiles from peripheral blood were associated with pathogen type and sepsis severity in children treated for suspected sepsis.
2020-01-01 | GSE119217 | GEO
Project description:RationaleEarly antibiotics improve outcomes for patients with sepsis. Factors influencing antibiotic timing in emergency department (ED) sepsis remain unclear.ObjectivesDetermine the relationship between prehospital level of care of patients with sepsis and ED door-to-antibiotic time.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study comprised patients admitted from the community to an academic ED June 2009 to February 2015 with fluid-refractory sepsis or septic shock. Transfer patients and those whose antibiotics began before ED arrival or after ED discharge were excluded. We used multivariable regression to evaluate the association between the time from ED arrival to antibiotic initiation and prehospital level of care, defined as the highest level of emergency medical services received: none, basic life support (BLS) ambulance, or advanced life support (ALS) ambulance. We measured variation in this association when hypotension was or was not present by ED arrival.ResultsAmong 361 community-dwelling patients with sepsis, the level of prehospital care correlated with illness severity. ALS-treated patients received antibiotics faster than patients who did not receive prehospital care (median, 103 [interquartile range, 75 to 135] vs. 144 [98 to 251] minutes, respectively) or BLS-only patients (168 [100-250] minutes; P < 0.001 for each pairwise comparison with ALS). This pattern persisted after multivariable adjustment, where ALS care (-43 min; 95% confidence interval [CI], -84 to -2; P = 0.033) but not BLS-only care (-4 min; 95% CI, -41 to +34; P = 0.97) was associated with less antibiotic delay compared with no prehospital care. ALS-treated patients more frequently received antibiotics within 3 hours of ED arrival (91%) compared with walk-in patients (62%; adjusted odds ratio, 3.11; 95% CI, 1.20 to 8.03; P = 0.015) or BLS-treated patients (56%; adjusted odds ratio, 4.51; 95% CI, 1.89 to 11.35; P < 0.001). ALS-treated patients started antibiotics faster than walk-in patients in the absence of hypotension by ED arrival (-41 min; 95% CI, -110 to -13; P = 0.009) but not when hypotension was present (+25 min; 95% CI, -43 to +92; P = 0.66).ConclusionsPrehospital ALS but not BLS-only care was associated with faster antibiotic initiation for patients with sepsis without hypotension. Process redesign for non-ALS patients may improve antibiotic timeliness for ED sepsis.
| S-EPMC6322022 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC5404540 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPenicillin allergy labels have gained increasing global attention. However, to date, there are no data on the influence of penicillin allergy labels on patients in Chinese mainland.MethodsThis retrospective study reviewed the electronic health record (EHR) of hospitalized patients between June 1, 2018 and May 31, 2019. Patients with a penicillin allergy record were included in the allergy group. Every allergy patient was matched with 4 control patients by using propensity score-based matching to make sure the following were balanced: age, sex, date of admission, and the main diagnosis. We estimated the prevalence of penicillin allergy labels and compared the antibiotic prescription patterns and other clinical outcomes between the 2 groups.ResultsA total of 5691 patients and 22 585 patients were included in the allergy group and control group, respectively. The prevalence of penicillin allergy labels among the hospitalized patients in this study was 4.00%. Compared to the control group, significantly fewer patients in the allergy group were prescribed penicillins and most cephalosporins, while a larger proportion of allergy patients received clindamycin (10.02% vs 5.41%, p < 0.001) and some higher-class antibiotics, such as monobactams (1.81% vs 0.54%, p < 0.001), carbapenems (5.80% vs 4.98%, p = 0.014), macrolides (0.60% vs 0.25%, p < 0.001), and quinolones (17.62% vs 12.40%, p < 0.001). Allergy patients also had longer hospital stays and a greater need to consult infection specialists.ConclusionThe prevalence of penicillin allergy labels was 4.00% in Chinese hospitalized patients. Penicillin allergy labels could cause irrational antibiotic prescribing, prolonged hospital stays, and greater consultation needs.
| S-EPMC9428801 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionSepsis is a common, potentially life-threatening complication of infection. The optimal treatment for sepsis includes prompt antibiotics and intravenous fluids, facilitated by its early and accurate recognition. Currently, clinicians identify and assess severity of suspected sepsis using validated clinical scoring systems. In England, the National Early Warning Score 2 (NEWS2) has been mandated across all National Health Service (NHS) trusts and ambulance organisations. Like many clinical scoring systems, NEWS2 should not be used without clinical judgement to determine either the level of acuity or a diagnosis. Despite this, there is a tendency to overemphasise the score in isolation in patients with suspected infection, leading to the overprescription of antibiotics and potentially treatment-related complications and rising antimicrobial resistance. The biomarker procalcitonin (PCT) has been shown to be useful in specific circumstances to support appropriate antibiotics prescribing by identifying bacterial infection. PCT is not routinely used in the care of undifferentiated patients presenting to emergency departments (EDs), and the evidence base of its optimal usage is poor. The PROcalcitonin and NEWS2 evaluation for Timely identification of sepsis and Optimal (PRONTO) study is a randomised controlled trial (RCT) in adults with suspected sepsis presenting to the ED to compare standard clinical management based on NEWS2 scoring plus PCT-guided risk assessment with standard clinical management based on NEWS2 scoring alone and compare if this approach reduces prescriptions of antibiotics without increasing mortality.Methods and analysisPRONTO is a parallel two-arm open-label individually RCT set in up to 20 NHS EDs in the UK with a target sample size of 7676 participants. Participants will be randomised in a ratio of 1:1 to standard clinical management based on NEWS2 scoring or standard clinical management based on NEWS2 scoring plus PCT-guided risk assessment. We will compare whether the addition of PCT measurement to NEWS2 scoring can lead to a reduction in intravenous antibiotic initiation in ED patients managed as suspected sepsis, with at least no increase in 28-day mortality compared with NEWS2 scoring alone (in conjunction with local standard care pathways). PRONTO has two coprimary endpoints: initiation of intravenous antibiotics at 3 hours (superiority comparison) and 28-day mortality (non-inferiority comparison). The study has an internal pilot phase and group-sequential stopping rules for effectiveness and futility/safety, as well as a qualitative substudy and a health economic evaluation.Ethics and disseminationThe trial protocol was approved by the Health Research Authority (HRA) and NHS Research Ethics Committee (Wales REC 2, reference 20/WA/0058). In England and Wales, the law allows the use of deferred consent in approved research situations (including ED studies) where the time dependent nature of intervention would not allow true informed consent to be obtained. PRONTO has approval for a deferred consent process to be used. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals and presented at scientific conferences.Trial registration numberISRCTN54006056.
| S-EPMC9196199 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PURPOSE:Sepsis is a common acute life-threatening condition that emergency physicians routinely face. Diagnostic options within the Emergency Department (ED) are limited due to lack of infrastructure, consequently limiting the use of invasive hemodynamic monitoring or imaging tests. The mortality rate due to sepsis can be assessed via multiple scoring systems, for example, mortality in emergency department sepsis (MEDS) score and sepsis patient evaluation in the emergency department (SPEED) score, both of which quantify the variation of mortality rates according to clinical findings, laboratory data, or therapeutic interventions. This study aims to improve the management processes of sepsis patients by comparing SPEED score and MEDS score for predicting the 28-day mortality in cases of emergency sepsis. METHODS:The study is a cross-sectional, prospective study including 61 sepsis patients in ED in Suez Canal University Hospital, Egypt, from August 2017 to June 2018. Patients were selected by two steps: (1) suspected septic patients presenting with at least one of the following abnormal clinical findings: (a) body temperature higher than 38 °C or lower than 36 °C, (b) heart rate higher than 90 beats/min, (c) hyperventilation evidenced by respiratory rate higher than 20 breaths/min or PaCO2 lower than 32 mmHg, and (d) white blood cell count higher than 12,000/μL or lower than 4000/μL; (2) confirmed septic patients with at least a 2-point increase from the baseline total sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score following infection. Other inclusion criteria included adult patients with an age ≥18 years regardless of gender and those who had either systemic inflammatory response syndrome or suspected/confirmed infection. Patients were shortly follow-up for the 28-day mortality. Each patient was subject to SPEED score and MEDS score and then the results were compared to detect which of them was more effective in predicting outcome. The receiver operating characteristic curves were also done for MEDS and SPEED scores. RESULTS:Among the 61 patients, 41 died with the mortality rate of 67.2%. The mortality rate increased with a higher SPEED and MEDS scores. Both SPEED and MEDS scores revealed significant difference between the survivors and nonsurvivors (p = 0.004 and p < 0.001, respectively), indicating that both the two systems are effective in predicting the 28-day mortality of sepsis patients. Thereafter, the receiver operating characteristic curves were plotted, which showed that SPEED was better than the MEDS score when applied to the complete study population with an area under the curve being 0.87 (0.788-0.963) as compared with 0.75 (0.634-0.876) for MEDS. Logistic regression analysis revealed that the best fitting predictor of 28-day mortality for sepsis patients was the SPEED scoring system. For every one unit increase in SPEED score, the odds of 28-day mortality increased by 37%. CONCLUSION:SPEED score is more useful and accurate than MEDS score in predicting the 28-day mortality among sepsis patients. Therefore SPEED rather than MEDS should be more widely used in the ED for sepsis patients.
| S-EPMC6921192 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7655694 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Accurate sepsis diagnosis is paramount for treatment decisions, especially at the emergency department (ED). To improve diagnosis, clinical decision support (CDS) tools are being developed with machine learning (ML) algorithms, using a wide range of variable groups. ML models can find patterns in Electronic Health Record (EHR) data that are unseen by the human eye. A prerequisite for a good model is the use of high-quality labels. Sepsis gold-standard labels are hard to define due to a lack of reliable diagnostic tools for sepsis at the ED. Therefore, standard clinical tools, such as clinical prediction scores (e.g. modified early warning score and quick sequential organ failure assessment), and claims-based methods (e.g. ICD-10) are used to generate suboptimal labels. As a consequence, models trained with these "silver" labels result in ill-trained models. In this study, we trained ML models for sepsis diagnosis at the ED with labels of 375 ED visits assigned by an endpoint adjudication committee (EAC) that consisted of 18 independent experts. Our objective was to evaluate which routinely measured variables show diagnostic value for sepsis. We performed univariate testing and trained multiple ML models with 95 routinely measured variables of three variable groups; demographic and vital, laboratory and advanced haematological variables. Apart from known diagnostic variables, we identified added diagnostic value for less conventional variables such as eosinophil count and platelet distribution width. In this explorative study, we show that the use of an EAC together with ML can identify new targets for future sepsis diagnosis research.
| S-EPMC9784058 | biostudies-literature