Dataset Information

Acceptability of innovative culture-based antibiotic prophylaxis strategies: a multi-method study on experiences regarding transrectal prostate biopsy.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The acceptability of innovative medical strategies among healthcare providers and patients affects their uptake in daily clinical practice.

Objectives

To explore experiences of healthcare providers and patients with culture-based antibiotic prophylaxis in transrectal prostate biopsy with three swab-screening scenarios: self-sampling at home, self-sampling in the hospital and sampling by a healthcare provider.

Methods

We performed focus group interviews with urologists and medical microbiologists from 11 hospitals and six connected clinical microbiological laboratories. We used Flottorp's comprehensive checklist for identifying determinants of practice to guide data collection and analysis. The experiences of 10 laboratory technicians from five laboratories and 452 patients from nine hospitals were assessed using a questionnaire.

Results

Overall, culture-based prophylaxis strategies were experienced as feasible in daily clinical practice. None of the three swab-screening scenarios performed better. For urologists (n = 5), implementation depended on the effectiveness of the strategy. In addition, it was important to them that the speed of existing oncology care pathways is preserved. Medical microbiologists (n = 5) and laboratory technicians (n = 8) expected the strategy to be fairly easy to implement. Patients (n = 430; response rate 95.1%) were generally satisfied with the screening scenario presented to them. To meet the various patients' needs and preferences, multiple scenarios within a hospital are probably needed.

Conclusions

This multi-method study has increased our understanding of the acceptability of culture-based prophylaxis strategies in prostate biopsy, which can help healthcare providers to offer high-quality patient-centred care. The strategy seems relatively straightforward to implement as overall acceptance appears to be high.

SUBMITTER: Tops SCM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8599774 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:We evaluated the effectiveness of targeted antimicrobial prophylaxis in transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy (TRUSP). METHODS:A prospective, non-randomized cohort study was conducted. Rectal swab cultures plated on non-selective blood agar and on selective MacConkey agar supplemented with ciprofloxacin identified ciprofloxacin-susceptible and -resistant gram-negative bacteria (CS-GNB and CR-GNB). Patients with CS-GNB received ciprofloxacin while those with CR-GNB received directed prophylaxis. Infectious complications were defined clinically and microbiologically within 30 days after TRUSP. Data were derived at 7 and 30 days post procedure by questionnaires and electronic medical records. We hypothesized that there would be no difference in the infectious outcomes among the CS and CR groups. RESULTS:From November 1, 2012 to March 31, 2015, 510 men completed the study; 430 (84.3%) had CS-GNB and 80 (15.7%) had CR-GNB. 484 (94.9%) completed the study per protocol, while 26 (5.1%) had an intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis. Of the 484, 475 (98.1%) had no infections, nine (1.9%) had infections, six of which (1.2%) were culture-proven (CP). The nine infections were as follows: five (1.0%) uncomplicated UTIs, one (0.2%) complicated UTI, and three (0.6%) urosepsis. One case of uncomplicated UTI and two cases of urosepsis were not CP, but were diagnosed clinically. ITT outcomes were similar. The infection rates were not statistically different between the CS-and CR-GNB patients (p-value = 0.314; 95% CI 0.8-3.3). The four patients with complicated UTIs or sepsis were hospitalized for a mean of 2.6 days and discharged without sequelae. Of the nine infections, three were antimicrobial prophylaxis failures (two ciprofloxacin and one amikacin); three were likely due to failure of the collection or processing of the rectal swab or increasing bacterial resistance between the time of swab collection and biopsy, and three developed clinical infections with no isolate recovered. CONCLUSIONS:Targeted antimicrobial prophylaxis follows the principles of antimicrobial stewardship and achieved a low rate of infectious complications with limited morbidity and no sequelae. This individualized method of prophylaxis may be widely applied. Further studies are needed to explore reasons for targeted prophylaxis failure and to determine comparative efficacy of non-ciprofloxacin-containing targeted prophylaxis regimens. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov. NCT01659866 . Registered 9 July 2012. First patient enrolled 1 November 2012.

Project description:INTRODUCTION: There is no consensus on how to investigate men with negative transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy (TRUS-B) but ongoing suspicion of cancer. Three strategies used are transperineal (TP-B), transrectal saturation (TS-B) and MRI-guided biopsy (MRI-B). We compared cancer yields of these strategies. METHODS: Papers were identified by search of Pubmed, Embase and Ovid Medline. Included studies investigated biopsy diagnostic yield in men with at least one negative TRUS-B and ongoing suspicion of prostate cancer. Data including age, PSA, number of previous biopsy episodes, number of cores at re-biopsy, cancer yield, and Gleason score of detected cancers were extracted. Meta-regression analyses were used to analyse the data. RESULTS: Forty-six studies were included; 12 of TS-B, 14 of TP-B, and 20 of MRI-B, representing 4,657 patients. Mean patient age, PSA and number of previous biopsy episodes were similar between the strategies. The mean number of biopsy cores obtained by TP-B and TS-B were greater than MRI-B. Cancer detection rates were 30·0%, 36·8%, and 37·6% for TS-B, TP-B, and MRI-B respectively. Meta-regression analysis showed that MRI-B had significantly higher cancer detection than TS-B. There were no significant differences however between MRI-B and TP-B, or TP-B and TS-B. In a sensitivity analysis incorporating number of previous biopsy episodes (36 studies) the difference between MRI-B and TP-B was not maintained resulting in no significant difference in cancer detection between the groups. There were no significant differences in median Gleason scores detected comparing the three strategies. CONCLUSIONS: In the re-biopsy setting, it is unclear which strategy offers the highest cancer detection rate. MRI-B may potentially detect more prostate cancers than other modalities and can achieve this with fewer biopsy cores. However, well-designed prospective studies with standardised outcome measures are needed to accurately compare modalities and define an optimum re-biopsy approach.