Dataset Information

Outcomes, Microbiology and Antimicrobial Usage in Pressure Ulcer-Related Pelvic Osteomyelitis: Messages for Clinical Practice.

ABSTRACT: Introduction: Pressure ulcer-related pelvic osteomyelitis is a relatively under-studied entity in the field of bone infection. We sought to add to the limited evidence base for managing this challenging syndrome. Methods: Cases were identified retrospectively from a surgical database and hospital discharge codes at a U.K. tertiary centre (2009-2018). Risk factors associated with outcomes were analysed by logistic regression. Results: We identified 35 patients (mean age 57.4 years), 69% managed with a combined medical and surgical approach, with mean follow-up of 3.7 years from index admission. Treatment failure (requiring further surgery or intravenous antimicrobials) occurred in 71% and eventual ulcer healing in 36%. One-year mortality was 23%. Lack of formal care support on discharge, post-traumatic (asensate) neurological deficit and index CRP (>184mg/L) were associated with treatment failure (p=0.001). Age (>59.5 years), lack of attempted soft tissue coverage, haemoglobin (<111g/L) and albumin (<25g/L) were associated with non-healing ulcers (p=0.003). Superficial wound swabs had low sensitivity and specificity compared to deep bone microbiology. Infection (based on deep bone microbiology from 46 infection episodes) was usually polymicrobial (87%), commonly involving S. aureus, Enterococci, GNB and anaerobes. Antimicrobial duration ranged from 0-103 days (mean 54) and was not associated with subsequent treatment failure. Conclusions: Attempted soft tissue coverage after surgical debridement, ensuring appropriate support for personal care after discharge and nutritional optimisation could improve outcomes. Superficial wound swabs are uninformative and deep bone sampling should be pursued. Long antimicrobial courses do not improve outcomes. Clinicians should engage patients in anticipatory care planning.

SUBMITTER: Russell CD

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7242403 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Outcomes, Microbiology and Antimicrobial Usage in Pressure Ulcer-Related Pelvic Osteomyelitis: Messages for Clinical Practice.

Russell Clark D CD Tsang Shao-Ting Jerry SJ Simpson Alasdair Hamish R W AHRW Sutherland Rebecca K RK

Journal of bone and joint infection 20200326 2

Introduction: Pressure ulcer-related pelvic osteomyelitis is a relatively under-studied entity in the field of bone infection. We sought to add to the limited evidence base for managing this challenging syndrome. Methods: Cases were identified retrospectively from a surgical database and hospital discharge codes at a U.K. tertiary centre (2009-2018). Risk factors associated with outcomes were analysed by logistic regression. Results: We identified 35 patients (mean age 57.4 ...[more]

PMID: 32455097

Similar Datasets

Project description:Accurate diagnosis of osteomyelitis underlying pressure ulcers is essential, as overdiagnosis exposes patients to unnecessary and prolonged antibiotic therapy, while failure to diagnose prevents successful treatment. Histopathological examination of bone biopsy specimens is the diagnostic gold standard. Bone biopsy can be an invasive procedure, and, for this reason, other diagnostic modalities are commonly used. However, their accuracy is questioned in literature. This systematic review aims to assess accuracy of various modalities (clinical, microbiological and radiological) for the diagnosis of pelvic osteomyelitis in patients with pressure ulcers as compared to the gold standard. A systematic literature search was conducted in July 2019 using the MEDLINE (Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System - MEDLARS - Online) and CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature) databases. The search terms were "decubitus ulcer", "pressure ulcer", "pressure sore", "bedsore" and "osteomyelitis". The inclusion criteria were original full-text articles in English comparing the results of bone histology with those of other diagnostic modalities in adult patients with pelvic pressure ulcers. Six articles were included in the systematic review. Clinical diagnosis was found to be neither specific nor sensitive. Microbiological examination, and in particular cultures of bone biopsy specimens, displayed high sensitivity but low specificity, likely reflecting contamination. Radiological imaging in the form of X-ray and CT (computed tomography) scans displayed high specificity but low sensitivity. MRI (magnetic resonance imaging), bone scanning and indium-labelled scintigraphy displayed high sensitivity but low specificity. Our systematic review did not find any diagnostic method (clinical, microbiological or radiological) to be reliable in the diagnosis of pelvic osteomyelitis associated with pressure ulcers as compared to bone histology.

Project description:ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to estimate the patterns of care and annual levels of healthcare resource use attributable to managing pressure ulcers (PUs) in clinical practice in the community by the UK's National Health Service (NHS), and the associated costs of patient management.MethodsThis was a retrospective cohort analysis of the records of 209 patients identified within a randomly selected population of 6000 patients with any type of wound obtained from The Health Improvement Network (THIN) Database, who developed a PU in the community and excluded hospital-acquired PUs. Patients' characteristics, wound-related health outcomes and healthcare resource use were quantified over 12 months from initial presentation, and the corresponding total NHS cost of patient management was estimated at 2015/2016 prices.Results50% of all the PUs healed within 12 months from initial presentation, but this varied between 100% for category 1 ulcers and 21% for category 4 ulcers. The mean time to healing ranged from 1.0 month for a category 1 ulcer to 8 months for a category 3/4 ulcer and 10 months for an unstageable ulcer. Patients were predominantly managed in the community by nurses with minimal clinical involvement of specialist clinicians. Up to 53% of all the ulcers may have been clinically infected at the time of presentation, and 35% of patients subsequently developed a putative wound infection a mean 4.7 months after initial presentation. The mean NHS cost of wound care over 12 months ranged from £1400 for a category 1 ulcer to >£8500 for the other categories of ulcer. Additionally, the cost of managing an unhealed ulcer was 2.4 times more than that of managing a healed ulcer (mean of £5140 vs £12 300 per ulcer).ConclusionThis study provides important insights into a number of aspects of PU management in clinical practice in the community that have been difficult to ascertain from other studies, and provides the best estimate available of NHS resource use and costs with which to inform policy and budgetary decisions.

Project description:Nurses must have sufficient education and training in microbiology to perform many roles within clinical nursing practice (e.g., administering antibiotics, collecting specimens, preparing specimens for transport and delivery, educating patients and families, communicating results to the healthcare team, and developing care plans based on results of microbiology studies and patient immunological status). It is unclear whether the current microbiology courses required of nursing students in the United States focus on the topics that are most relevant to nursing practice. To gauge the relevance of current microbiology education to nursing practice, we created a confidential, web-based survey that asked nurses about their past microbiology education, the types of microbiology specimens they collect, their duties that require knowledge of microbiology, and how frequently they encounter infectious diseases in practice. We used the survey responses to develop data-driven recommendations for educators who teach microbiology to pre-nursing and nursing students. Two hundred ninety-six Registered Nurses (RNs) completed the survey. The topics they deemed most relevant to current practice were infection control, hospital-acquired infections, disease transmission, and collection and handling of patient specimens. Topics deemed least relevant were the Gram stain procedure and microscope use. In addition, RNs expressed little interest in molecular testing methods. This may reflect a gap in their understanding of the uses of these tests, which could be bridged in a microbiology course. We now have data in support of anecdotal evidence that nurses are most engaged when learning about microbiology topics that have the greatest impact on patient care. Information from this survey will be used to shift the focus of microbiology courses at our university to topics more relevant to nursing practice. Further, these findings may also support an effort to evolve national recommendations for microbiology education in pre-nursing and nursing curricula.

Project description:BackgroundPast respiratory viral epidemics suggest that bacterial infections impact clinical outcomes. There is minimal information on potential co-pathogens in patients with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) in the US. We analyzed pathogens, antimicrobial use, and healthcare utilization in hospitalized US patients with and without severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2).MethodsThis multicenter retrospective study included patients with > 1 day of inpatient admission and discharge/death between March 1 and May 31, 2020 at 241 US acute care hospitals in the BD Insights Research Database. We assessed microbiological testing data, antimicrobial utilization in admitted patients with ≥24 h of antimicrobial therapy, and length of stay (LOS).ResultsA total of 141,621 patients were tested for SARS-CoV-2 (17,003 [12.0%] positive) and 449,339 patients were not tested. Most (> 90%) patients tested for SARS-CoV-2 had additional microbiologic testing performed compared with 41.9% of SARS-CoV-2-untested patients. Non-SARS-CoV-2 pathogen rates were 20.9% for SARS-CoV-2-positive patients compared with 21.3 and 27.9% for SARS-CoV-2-negative and -untested patients, respectively. Gram-negative bacteria were the most common pathogens (45.5, 44.1, and 43.5% for SARS-CoV-2-positive, -negative, and -untested patients). SARS-CoV-2-positive patients had higher rates of hospital-onset (versus admission-onset) non-SARS-CoV-2 pathogens compared with SARS-CoV-2-negative or -untested patients (42.4, 22.2, and 19.5%, respectively), more antimicrobial usage (68.0, 45.2, and 25.1% of patients), and longer hospital LOS (mean [standard deviation (SD)] of 8.6 [11.4], 5.1 [8.9], and 4.2 [8.0] days) and intensive care unit (ICU) LOS (mean [SD] of 7.8 [8.5], 3.6 [6.2], and 3.6 [5.9] days). For all groups, the presence of a non-SARS-CoV-2 pathogen was associated with increased hospital LOS (mean [SD] days for patients with versus without a non-SARS-CoV-2 pathogen: 13.7 [15.7] vs 7.3 [9.6] days for SARS-CoV-2-positive patients, 8.2 [11.5] vs 4.3 [7.9] days for SARS-CoV-2-negative patients, and 7.1 [11.0] vs 3.9 [7.4] days for SARS-CoV-2-untested patients).ConclusionsDespite similar rates of non-SARS-CoV-2 pathogens in SARS-CoV-2-positive, -negative, and -untested patients, SARS-CoV-2 was associated with higher rates of hospital-onset infections, greater antimicrobial usage, and extended hospital and ICU LOS. This finding highlights the heavy burden of the COVID-19 pandemic on healthcare systems and suggests possible opportunities for diagnostic and antimicrobial stewardship.

Project description:IntroductionPressure ulcers are serious and potentially life-threatening problems across all age groups and across all medical specialties and care settings. The hospitalised elderly population is the most common group to develop pressure ulcers. This study aims to systematically review studies implementing pressure ulcer prevention strategies recommended in the Pressure Ulcer Prevention Practice Guidelines for the prevention of pressure ulcers among hospitalised elderly patients globally.Methods and analysisA systematic review of all studies that have assessed the use of pressure ulcer prevention strategies in hospital settings among hospitalised elderly patients shall be conducted. A comprehensive search of all published articles in Medline Ovid, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane library, Scopus and Web of Science will be done using terms such as pressure ulcers, prevention strategies, elderly patients and hospital. Studies will be screened for eligibility through title, abstract and full text by two independent reviewers. Study quality and risk of bias will be assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute for Meta-Analysis of Statistics Assessment and Review Instrument. If sufficient data are available, a meta-analysis will be conducted to synthesise the effect size reported as OR with 95% CIs using both fixed and random effect models. I2 statistics and visual inspection of the forest plots will be used to assess heterogeneity and identify the potential sources of heterogeneity. Publication bias will be assessed by visual inspections of funnel plots and Egger's test.Ethics and disseminationNo formal ethical approval or consent is required as no primary data will be collected. We aim to publish the research findings in a peer-reviewed scientific journal to promote knowledge transfer, as well as in conferences, seminars, congresses or symposia in a traditional manner.Prospero registration numberCRD42019129088.

Dataset Information

Outcomes, Microbiology and Antimicrobial Usage in Pressure Ulcer-Related Pelvic Osteomyelitis: Messages for Clinical Practice.

Publications

Outcomes, Microbiology and Antimicrobial Usage in Pressure Ulcer-Related Pelvic Osteomyelitis: Messages for Clinical Practice.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets