Melo Daniela Oliveira de, Sasaki Marli, Grinbaum Renato Satovschi
Pharmaceutical Sciences School, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Braz J Infect Dis. 2007 Feb;11(1):53-6. doi: 10.1590/s1413-86702007000100014.
This study evaluates vancomycin prescribing patterns in a tertiary-care hospital, with high prevalence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, comparing with the guidelines proposed by the Hospital Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee. The study was conducted in a 930-bed tertiary-care hospital, during 40 days (March 10 to April 30, 2003). Data were collected of all patients given vancomycin, using a standardized chart-extraction form designed. Inappropriate use was subdivided in five categories: empiric therapy without risk factors; continued empiric use for presumed infections in patients whose cultures were negative for beta-lactam-resistant Gram-positive microorganisms; treatment of infections caused by beta-lactam-sensitive Gram-positive microorganisms, without allergy history to beta-lactam antimicrobials; treatment in response to a single blood culture positive for coagulase-negative staphylococcus, if other blood cultures taken during the same time frame were negative; systemic or local prophylaxis for infection or colonization of indwelling central or peripheral intravascular catheters. Of 132 orders, 126 (95.4%) were considered to have been appropriate. Of these 126 prescriptions, 31 (24.6%) were administered for treatment of proven Gram-positive infections (78.1% of those were MRSA), 1 (0.8%) for beta-lactam allergy and 95 (75.4%) for empiric treatment of suspected Gram-positive infections. The majority of the patients (88.6%) have used antimicrobial recently (3 months). The mean pre-treatment hospitalization period was 14 +/- 15 days. Of the 132 treatments, 105 (79.5%) were nosocomial infections. In the institution analyzed, the vancomycin use was considered conscientious. Reduction in use of glycopeptide may be obtained by adaptations the CDC criteria, or by improvement of diagnostic criteria.
本研究评估了一家耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌感染率高的三级医院中万古霉素的处方模式,并与医院感染控制实践咨询委员会提出的指南进行了比较。该研究在一家拥有930张床位的三级医院进行,为期40天(2003年3月10日至4月30日)。使用设计好的标准化图表提取表格收集了所有接受万古霉素治疗的患者的数据。不恰当使用被细分为五类:无危险因素的经验性治疗;对β-内酰胺耐药革兰氏阳性微生物培养阴性的患者,继续对假定感染进行经验性治疗;治疗由β-内酰胺敏感革兰氏阳性微生物引起的感染,且无β-内酰胺类抗菌药物过敏史;如果在同一时间段采集的其他血培养结果为阴性,则对凝固酶阴性葡萄球菌血培养单次阳性的情况进行治疗;对留置中心或外周血管内导管的感染或定植进行全身或局部预防。在132份医嘱中,126份(95.4%)被认为是恰当的。在这126份处方中,31份(24.6%)用于治疗已证实的革兰氏阳性感染(其中78.1%为耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌),1份(0.8%)用于β-内酰胺过敏,95份(75.4%)用于对疑似革兰氏阳性感染进行经验性治疗。大多数患者(88.6%)近期(3个月内)使用过抗菌药物。治疗前的平均住院时间为14±15天。在132例治疗中,105例(79.5%)为医院感染。在所分析的机构中,万古霉素的使用被认为是谨慎的。通过调整疾病控制与预防中心的标准或改进诊断标准,可以减少糖肽类药物的使用。