Suppr超能文献

荷兰全科医生和急诊科对破伤风暴露后预防指南的使用情况:一项横断面问卷调查研究

The use of tetanus post-exposure prophylaxis guidelines by general practitioners and emergency departments in the Netherlands: a cross-sectional questionnaire study.

作者信息

Donken Robine, van der Maas Nicoline, Swaan Corien, Wiersma Tjerk, Te Wierik Margreet, Hahné Susan, de Melker Hester

机构信息

Centre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, P,O, Box 1 (postbak 75), 3720 BA Bilthoven, The Netherlands.

出版信息

BMC Fam Pract. 2014 Jun 9;15:112. doi: 10.1186/1471-2296-15-112.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The Dutch National Immunisation Programme includes six tetanus toxoid (TT) vaccinations and reaches a high rate of vaccination coverage. In the Netherlands, several guidelines related to tetanus post-exposure prophylaxis (T-PEP) are in place. In 2003, the Dutch Health Council (HC) reviewed the use of T-PEP. The aim of this study is to evaluate whether the HC recommendations have been implemented.

METHODS

We asked 178 Dutch General Practitioner (GP) offices and 60 Emergency Departments (EDs) to participate in a cross-sectional questionnaire study and requested that participating facilities send in the T-PEP guidelines adopted by their practice. The differences, based on categories mentioned in the HC recommendations, between GPs and EDs and the type of T-PEP guidelines adopted were assessed.

RESULTS

The response rates for the GPs and EDs were 38% (n=67) and 70% (n=42), respectively. 98% percent (n=107) of the participants reported having T-PEP guidelines. Of the guidelines described in the survey responses, 28% (n=23; EDs 41%, GPs 21%) were consistent with the HC-recommendations, 36% (n=29; EDs 7%, GPs 52%) adhered to the guidelines of the College of GPs (CGP), which restricts the use of T-PEP to tetanus prone wounds but for these wounds is in line with the recommendations of the HC. The remaining 36% had adopted other guidelines, most of which can lead to over-prescription of T-PEP. Information on T-PEP was lacking in patients with higher risk vaccination histories.

CONCLUSION

Almost all participants have adopted T-PEP guidelines. Strict adherence to the HC recommendations is low. More than half of GPs have adopted the more restrictive CGP-guideline, which limits T-PEP to tetanus prone wounds.

摘要

背景

荷兰国家免疫规划包括六次破伤风类毒素(TT)疫苗接种,且疫苗接种覆盖率很高。在荷兰,有多项关于破伤风暴露后预防(T-PEP)的指南。2003年,荷兰卫生理事会(HC)对T-PEP的使用进行了审查。本研究的目的是评估HC的建议是否得到了实施。

方法

我们邀请了178家荷兰全科医生(GP)诊所和60家急诊科(ED)参与一项横断面问卷调查研究,并要求参与的机构提交其采用的T-PEP指南。根据HC建议中提到的类别,评估了全科医生和急诊科之间的差异以及所采用的T-PEP指南的类型。

结果

全科医生和急诊科的回复率分别为38%(n = 67)和70%(n = 42)。98%(n = 107)的参与者报告有T-PEP指南。在调查回复中描述的指南中,28%(n = 23;急诊科为41%,全科医生为21%)与HC的建议一致,36%(n = 29;急诊科为7%,全科医生为52%)遵循了全科医生学院(CGP)的指南,该指南将T-PEP的使用限制于破伤风易感性伤口,但对于这些伤口符合HC的建议。其余36%采用了其他指南,其中大多数可能导致T-PEP的过度处方。疫苗接种史风险较高的患者缺乏T-PEP信息。

结论

几乎所有参与者都采用了T-PEP指南。对HC建议的严格遵循程度较低。超过一半的全科医生采用了更具限制性的CGP指南,该指南将T-PEP限制于破伤风易感性伤口。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5e55/4069364/afd71a1f3c77/1471-2296-15-112-1.jpg

相似文献

本文引用的文献

5
[Managing the risk of wound tetanus in family practice].
Med Mal Infect. 2011 Aug;41(8):424-9. doi: 10.1016/j.medmal.2010.12.014. Epub 2011 Mar 22.

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验