Dataset Information

Clinical decision-making on spinal cord injury-associated pneumonia: a nationwide survey in Germany.

ABSTRACT:

Study design

Survey study.

Objectives

Spinal cord injury (SCI)-associated pneumonia (SCI-AP) is associated with poor functional recovery and a major cause of death after SCI. Better tackling SCI-AP requires a common understanding on how SCI-AP is defined. This survey examines clinical algorithms relevant for diagnosis and treatment of SCI-AP.

Setting

All departments for SCI-care in Germany.

Methods

The clinical decision-making on SCI-AP and the utility of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) criteria for diagnosis of 'clinically defined pneumonia' were assessed by means of a standardized questionnaire including eight case vignettes of suspected SCI-AP. The diagnostic decisions based on the case information were analysed using classification and regression trees (CART).

Results

The majority of responding departments were aware of the CDC-criteria (88%). In the clinical vignettes, 38-81% of the departments diagnosed SCI-AP in accordance with the CDC-criteria and 7-41% diagnosed SCI-AP in deviation from the CDC-criteria. The diagnostic agreement was not associated with the availability of standard operating procedures for SCI-AP management in the departments. CART analysis identified radiological findings, fever, and worsened gas exchange as most important for the decision on SCI-AP. Frequently requested supplementary diagnostics were microbiological analyses, C-reactive protein, and procalcitonin. For empirical antibiotic therapy, the departments used (acyl-)aminopenicillins/β-lactamase inhibitors, cephalosporins, or combinations of (acyl-)aminopenicillins/β-lactamase inhibitors with fluoroquinolones or carbapenems.

Conclusions

This survey reveals a diagnostic ambiguity regarding SCI-AP despite the awareness of CDC-criteria and established SOPs. Heterogeneous clinical practice is encouraging the development of disease-specific guidelines for diagnosis and management of SCI-AP.

SUBMITTER: Druschel C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7223654 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Objectives To assess the use of prognostic patient factors and predictive tests in clinical decision making for spinal fusion in patients with chronic low back pain. Design and setting Nationwide survey among spine surgeons in the Netherlands. Participants Surgeon members of the Dutch Spine Society were questioned on their surgical treatment strategy for chronic low back pain. Primary and secondary outcome measures The surgeons' opinion on the use of prognostic patient factors and predictive tests for patient selection were addressed on Likert scales, and the degree of uniformity was assessed. In addition, the influence of surgeon-specific factors, such as clinical experience and training, on decision making was determined. Results The comments from 62 surgeons (70% response rate) were analysed. Forty-four surgeons (71%) had extensive clinical experience. There was a statistically significant lack of uniformity of opinion in seven of the 11 items on prognostic factors and eight of the 11 items on predictive tests, respectively. Imaging was valued much higher than predictive tests, psychological screening or patient preferences (all p<0.01). Apart from the use of discography and long multisegment fusions, differences in training or clinical experience did not appear to be of significant influence on treatment strategy. Conclusions The present survey showed a lack of consensus among spine surgeons on the appreciation and use of predictive tests. Prognostic patient factors were not consistently incorporated in their treatment strategy either. Clinical decision making for spinal fusion to treat chronic low back pain does not have a uniform evidence base in practice. Future research should focus on identifying subgroups of patients for whom spinal fusion is an effective treatment, as only a reliable prediction of surgical outcome, combined with the implementation of individual patient factors, may enable the instalment of consensus guidelines for surgical decision making in patients with chronic low back pain.

Project description:Although osteoporosis is common following spinal cord injury (SCI), no guidelines exist for its treatment, diagnosis, or prevention. The authors hypothesized that wide variations in diagnosis and treatment practices result from the absence of guidelines. This study sought to characterize the diagnosis and management practices within the VA health care system for osteoporosis following SCI.Online survey regarding osteoporosis management in SCI composed of 27 questions designed to gather information on responder demographics, osteoporosis diagnostics, and treatment options.VA health care system.VHA National SCI Staff Physicians and VHA National SCI Nurses (total n = 450) were sent an email with an invitation to participate.Not applicable.Practice patterns were assessed, including factors associated with ordering a clinical workup and prescribing osteoporosis treatment.The response rate was 28%. Ninety-two prescribing practitioners (physicians, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants) were included in the analysis. Of these respondents, 50 (54%) prescribe medications for SCI-induced bone loss; 39 (42%) prescribe bisphosphonates and 46 (50%) prescribe vitamin D. There were 54 (59%) respondents who routinely order diagnostic tests, including dual energy x-ray absorptiometry scans in 50 (54%). Variations in practice were not explained by age, gender, or years practicing SCI medicine. Many respondents (23%) reported barriers to osteoporosis testing including lack of scanning protocols, cost, wheelchair inaccessibility of scanning facilities, and lack of effective treatment guidelines once osteoporosis is diagnosed.Despite an absence of screening and treatment guidelines, more than half of all respondents are actively diagnosing and treating osteoporosis with bisphosphonates within the VA health care setting. These data suggest that evidence-based practice guidelines are necessary to reduce practice variations and improve clinical care for this population.