Dataset Information

Patient preferences for treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections in the emergency department.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Limited research has assessed patient preferences for treatment disposition and antibiotic therapy of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infection (ABSSSI) in the emergency department (ED). Understanding patient preference for the treatment of ABSSSI may influence treatment selection and improve satisfaction.

Methods

A survey was conducted across 6 US hospital EDs. Patients with ABSSSI completed a baseline survey assessing preferences for antibiotic therapy (intravenous versus oral) and treatment location. A follow-up survey was conducted within 30-40?days after ED discharge to reassess preferences and determine satisfaction with care.

Results

A total of 94 patients completed both baseline and follow-up surveys. Sixty (63.8%) participants had a history of ABSSSI, and 69 (73.4%) were admitted to the hospital. Treatment at home was the most common preference reported on baseline and follow-up surveys. Patients with higher education were 82.2% less likely to prefer treatment in the hospital. Single dose intravenous therapy was the most commonly preferred antibiotic regimen on baseline and follow-up surveys (39.8 and 19.1%, respectively). Median satisfaction scores for care in the ED, hospital, home, and with overall antibiotic therapy were all 8 out of a maximum of 10.

Conclusions

In these patients, the most common preference was for outpatient care and single dose intravenous antibiotics. Patient characteristics including higher education, younger age, and current employment were associated with these preferences. Opportunities exist for improving ABSSSI care and satisfaction rates by engaging patients and offering multiple treatment choices.

SUBMITTER: Almarzoky Abuhussain SS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6278032 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Patient preferences for treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections in the emergency department.

Almarzoky Abuhussain Safa S SS Burak Michelle A MA Kohman Kelsey N KN Jacknin Gabrielle G Tart Serina B SB Hobbs Athena L V ALV Adams Danyel K DK Nailor Michael D MD Keyloun Katelyn R KR Nicolau David P DP Kuti Joseph L JL

BMC health services research 20181204 1

<h4>Background</h4>Limited research has assessed patient preferences for treatment disposition and antibiotic therapy of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infection (ABSSSI) in the emergency department (ED). Understanding patient preference for the treatment of ABSSSI may influence treatment selection and improve satisfaction.<h4>Methods</h4>A survey was conducted across 6 US hospital EDs. Patients with ABSSSI completed a baseline survey assessing preferences for antibiotic therapy (intrav ...[more]

PMID: 30514295

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionAcute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSIs) are frequently treated in emergency departments (EDs) or observation units (OUs) initially with intravenous (IV) antibiotics before discharge on oral therapy. This study aims to describe ABSSSI patients discharged directly from EDs/OUs.MethodsThis is a retrospective cohort study of patients with ABSSSIs treated in EDs/OUs of the Detroit Medical Center from 2012 to 2014. Adults with less than 24 h of IV antibiotics without hospital admission were included. Demographics, clinical characteristics, and severity were compared between ED and OU patients. Resource utilization, including tissue and blood cultures, and use of radiographic analysis was also collected. The primary outcome was 96-h ED revisit/hospitalization.ResultsAnalysis included 308 patients; 219 ED and 89 OU. OU patients were significantly more likely to be obese, have COPD/asthma, be diagnosed with cellulitis, and meet at least one systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criterion. Tissue cultures were obtained in 21.7% of abscesses in the ED; 67.9% were in uncomplicated abscesses. In the OU tissue cultures were obtained in 48.8% of abscesses and 37.5% were uncomplicated cases. Blood cultures were drawn in 18.3% of ED patients and 56.2% of OU patients, not significantly associated with the presence of SIRS criteria. Radiology was used in the diagnosis of ABSSSIs in 33.5% of ED versus 69.5% OU patients (p < 0.001), Plain film radiograph being the most common. Thirty patients revisited the ED or required hospitalization within 96 h, 23 from the ED (p = 0.479). Prior history of ABSSSI (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 2.382, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.264-6.346) and location on torso/buttocks (aOR = 2.355, 95% CI 1.067-5.197) were independent predictors.ConclusionsThe low rate of ED revisit/hospitalization supports the use of OUs for low acuity ABSSSIs requiring initial IV therapy. Resource utilization within EDs/OUs for the management of ABSSSIs needs to be evaluated for unnecessary testing/procures.

Project description:BackgroundOmadacycline is an oral and intravenous (IV) once-daily aminomethylcycline antibiotic that is approved in the United States for the treatment of adults with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI). It has broad-spectrum activity against common causative pathogens of ABSSSI, including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Omadacycline has been shown to be noninferior to linezolid for the treatment of adults with ABSSSI across 2 phase 3 clinical trials. To date, no studies have assessed the budget impact for omadacycline in the treatment of ABSSSI.ObjectivesTo estimate the potential budget impact of introducing omadacycline as a treatment option in patients who present to the emergency department (ED) with ABSSSI from the hospital perspective (Medicare payer) in the United States. The ED's and observation units were assumed to be hospital-owned.MethodsThe base case of this decision model-based analysis was conducted from the perspective of a hospital for a theoretical cohort of 1 million covered Medicare members over a 3-year time horizon. Scenario analyses included the economic impact of (1) shifting inpatient care to the outpatient setting with omadacycline and (2) reducing hospital length of stay (LOS) among hospitalized patients with omadacycline IV to oral therapy relative to the current inpatient standard of care. Costs are presented in 2017 US dollars with no adjustments for inflation, based on the cost model estimates.ResultsThe annual total incremental cost following the introduction of omadacycline as a treatment of ABSSSI was $11,168, $39,918, and $88,777 in years 1, 2, and 3, respectively. The incremental cost per member treated (cost per case) rose by $0.49, $1.74, and $3.86 over 3 years. Reducing hospital LOS by 1 day among hospitalized patients with omadacycline resulted in incremental costs of $4311, $15,231, and $33,919 in years 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Under the assumption that patients may be discharged sooner when an oral formulation of the same drug with which they are being treated is available, reducing hospital LOS by 2 days reduced costs by $2546, $9455, and $20,939 in years 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Shifting inpatient care to the outpatient setting with omadacycline reduced costs by $38,777, $139,885, and $310,784 in years 1, 2, and 3, respectively.ConclusionThis hypothetical, model-based study determined that omadacycline would result in a modest increase in total cost over 3 years when introduced as a treatment for ABSSSI in adults who present to the ED for their care.

Dataset Information

Patient preferences for treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections in the emergency department.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Patient preferences for treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections in the emergency department.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets