Suppr超能文献

临床肺部感染评分会影响重症监护病房的抗生素使用天数吗?

Can the clinical pulmonary infection score impact ICU antibiotic days?

作者信息

Swoboda Sandra M, Dixon Tara, Lipsett Pamela A

机构信息

Department of Surgery, The Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland 21287-4685, USA.

出版信息

Surg Infect (Larchmt). 2006 Aug;7(4):331-9. doi: 10.1089/sur.2006.7.331.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The Clinical Pulmonary Infection Score (CPIS) has been used in the intensive care unit (ICU) as a decision tool for initiation of antibiotics in suspected pneumonia and also for discontinuing antibiotics if the CPIS score is <or=6 on day three of therapy, but it is not in common clinical use. We sought to determine if application of a CPIS score<or=6 at three days could reduce antibiotic use and if a blinded committee would have a greater percentage of patients with CPIS>6 on day one receiving antibiotics empirically for pneumonia.

METHODS

Over 11 months, we evaluated empiric antibiotics prospectively in two ICUs of a large tertiary university teaching hospital. A pneumonia committee (PC) reviewed all patients and defined pneumonia according to the guidelines of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The CPIS was calculated for all patients at day one and day three of antibiotic therapy. The percentage of patients with a CPIS<or=6 was compared for the ICU and PC, and the total antibiotic days potentially saved by using CPIS<or=6 as the criterion for treatment were determined. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and inter-observer reliability were determined.

RESULTS

Three hundred twelve patients received empiric antibiotics, 83 of whom were believed to have pneumonia by the ICU staff (2,283 antibiotic days). On day one, the 55 patients started on antibiotics had a CPIS<or=6, with 1,460 antibiotic-days, and only 28 patients had a CPIS>6 (823 antibiotic-days). In contrast, the PC determined 19 patients (23%) to have pneumonia by the CDC definition (731 antibiotic-days), with eight of these patients having a CPIS<or=6 and 11 a CPIS>6. Pneumonia committee review resulted in fewer patients believed to have pneumonia and a greater percentage with a CPIS>6 (odds ratio [OR] 2.7; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.86, 8.6; p=0.05). Restriction of antibiotics to patients with a CPIS>6 would have saved 1,460 antibiotic-days at day one and 1,053 days if treatment was delayed until day three. Clinical Pulmonary Infection Score ROC curves for the PC showed an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.82 (95% CI 0.72, 0.91), whereas the AUC for the ICU group was 0.85 (95% CI 0.79, 0.92). The sensitivity and specificity of a CPIS>6 for the PC were 79% and 75%, respectively, with correct prediction 76% of the time. The inter-observer reliability of the CPIS had a kappa value of 0.88.

CONCLUSIONS

This prospective evaluation confirms that 50% of antibiotic-days in our ICU are used empirically for pneumonia when that infection is not likely to be present by either CDC or CPIS criteria. Although the CPIS has good reliability and acceptable sensitivity and specificity, PC review and CPIS<or=6 were commonly divergent (42-47%). Thus, better strategies should be developed for identification of pneumonia and empiric antibiotic administration in the ICU.

摘要

背景

临床肺部感染评分(CPIS)已在重症监护病房(ICU)中用作怀疑肺炎时启动抗生素治疗的决策工具,并且如果在治疗第三天CPIS评分≤6,也可用于停用抗生素,但它在临床中并不常用。我们试图确定在三天时应用CPIS评分≤6是否可以减少抗生素的使用,以及一个盲法委员会是否会使更多第一天CPIS>6的患者因肺炎而经验性接受抗生素治疗。

方法

在11个月的时间里,我们在一家大型三级大学教学医院的两个ICU中对经验性抗生素治疗进行了前瞻性评估。一个肺炎委员会(PC)对所有患者进行了审查,并根据美国疾病控制与预防中心(CDC)的指南定义了肺炎。在抗生素治疗的第一天和第三天计算所有患者的CPIS。比较了ICU和PC中CPIS≤6的患者百分比,并确定了以CPIS≤6作为治疗标准可能节省的总抗生素使用天数。确定了受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线和观察者间可靠性。

结果

312例患者接受了经验性抗生素治疗,其中83例被ICU工作人员认为患有肺炎(2283个抗生素使用日)。第一天,开始使用抗生素的55例患者CPIS≤6,有1460个抗生素使用日,只有28例患者CPIS>6(823个抗生素使用日)。相比之下,PC根据CDC定义确定19例患者(23%)患有肺炎(731个抗生素使用日),其中8例患者CPIS≤6,11例患者CPIS>6。肺炎委员会的审查导致被认为患有肺炎的患者减少,CPIS>6的患者百分比更高(优势比[OR]2.7;95%置信区间[CI]0.86,8.6;p=0.05)。如果将抗生素治疗限制在CPIS>6的患者,第一天可节省1460个抗生素使用日,如果将治疗推迟到第三天则可节省1053天。PC的临床肺部感染评分ROC曲线显示曲线下面积(AUC)为0.82(95%CI 0.72,0.91),而ICU组的AUC为0.85(95%CI 0.79,0.92)。对于PC,CPIS>6的敏感性和特异性分别为79%和75%,正确预测率为76%。CPIS的观察者间可靠性kappa值为0.88。

结论

这项前瞻性评估证实,根据CDC或CPIS标准,我们ICU中50%的抗生素使用日是在不太可能存在肺炎感染的情况下经验性使用的。虽然CPIS具有良好的可靠性和可接受的敏感性及特异性,但PC审查和CPIS≤6通常存在分歧(42%-47%)。因此,应制定更好的策略来识别ICU中的肺炎并进行经验性抗生素给药。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验