Pennine Acute Trust, Royal Oldham Hospital, Rochdale Road, Oldham, OL1 2JH, UK.
Clin Rheumatol. 2011 May;30(5):707-10. doi: 10.1007/s10067-010-1672-3. Epub 2011 Jan 11.
This study aims to determine the current practices and beliefs of United Kingdom (UK)-based rheumatologists and orthopedic surgeons (OS) in managing septic arthritis (SA) and to determine awareness levels of national guidance. Two-hundred OS and 200 rheumatologists were sent a link to a web-based survey tool via email. Questions posed related to the management of SA, including the respondent's views on antibiotic therapy, joint drainage, which specialty should manage these cases, and also the clinician's evidence base. There were 354 functioning addresses with 182 responses (51%). One hundred fifty-one (77 OS, 74 rheumatologists) (43%) responses were complete and included for analysis. Eighty percent of rheumatologists and 82% of OS recommended 6-weeks total antibiotic therapy. Seventy-three percent in each group recommended 1-2 weeks intravenous therapy initially followed by oral continuation therapy. In patients at risk of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), 25% rheumatologists and 14% OS would ensure MRSA cover. Seventy-seven percent of rheumatologists and 66% of OS recommended surgical joint drainage; 22% and 27%, respectively, recommended repeated closed needle aspiration as their chosen method of joint drainage. Sixty-six percent of rheumatologists and 65% of OS believed OS should manage SA. Twenty-three percent of rheumatologists and 22% of OS quoted published guidance as their main evidence base in the treatment of SA. Only 24% of rheumatologists and 34% of OS quoted British Society of Rheumatology (BSR) guidance when asked if they were aware of any guidelines. Views of rheumatologists and OS are not that dissimilar in managing SA. Surprisingly, rheumatologists are more aggressive regarding the recommendation for surgical joint drainage. Within both groups, significant variation in management principles exists often discrepant to recommendations laid out by the BSR. There are poor awareness levels of the BSR guidelines.
这项研究旨在确定英国(UK)的风湿病学家和骨科医生(OS)在治疗脓毒性关节炎(SA)方面的当前实践和观念,并确定他们对国家指南的认识水平。我们向 200 名 OS 和 200 名风湿病学家发送了电子邮件链接,以访问在线调查工具。提出的问题与 SA 的管理有关,包括受访者对抗生素治疗、关节引流、应由哪个专业管理这些病例以及临床医生的证据基础的看法。有 354 个有效地址,其中有 182 个回复(51%)。151 个(77%的 OS,74%的风湿病学家)(43%)完整的回复被纳入分析。80%的风湿病学家和 82%的 OS 推荐总抗生素治疗 6 周。每组中有 73%的人最初推荐静脉治疗 1-2 周,然后继续口服治疗。在有耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌(MRSA)风险的患者中,25%的风湿病学家和 14%的 OS 会确保 MRSA 覆盖。77%的风湿病学家和 66%的 OS 建议进行手术关节引流;分别有 22%和 27%的人建议重复闭式抽吸作为他们选择的关节引流方法。66%的风湿病学家和 65%的 OS 认为 OS 应该管理 SA。23%的风湿病学家和 22%的 OS 引用出版的指南作为治疗 SA 的主要证据基础。当被问及是否了解任何指南时,只有 24%的风湿病学家和 34%的 OS 引用了英国风湿病学会(BSR)的指南。在管理 SA 方面,风湿病学家和 OS 的观点并没有那么大的不同。令人惊讶的是,风湿病学家在推荐手术关节引流方面更为激进。在这两个组中,管理原则存在很大差异,往往与 BSR 提出的建议不一致。BSR 指南的认知度较低。