Preslaski C R, Mueller S W, Kiser T H, Fish D N, MacLaren R
Department of Pharmacy, Denver Health Medical Center, Denver, CO, USA.
J Clin Pharm Ther. 2014 Dec;39(6):658-62. doi: 10.1111/jcpt.12208. Epub 2014 Sep 20.
Practices vary between institutions and amongst prescribers regarding when to initiate stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP), which agent to choose (including doses and frequencies) and rationale, and decisions about escalation or discontinuation of therapy. The purpose of this survey is to evaluate the perceptions of prescribers about risk assessment of stress-related mucosal bleeding (SRMB) and practice patterns of SUP.
A cross-sectional survey of 800 US critical care prescribers using the membership of the Society of Critical Care Medicine. The levels of agreement with specific statements were rated on a nine-point Likert scale.
Of 712 eligible recipients, 245 (34·4%) completed the questionnaire. Respondents were primarily attending physicians (81·2%) working in adult medical or surgical (59·2%) intensive care units. Mucosal ischaemia was identified as the pathophysiological cause of SRMB by 110 (44·9%) respondents. Respondents agreed that risk factors for SRMB were acute hepatic failure, anticoagulant use, burns >35%, coagulopathy, absence of enteral feeding, recent gastroduodenal ulcer, corticosteroid use, Helicobacter pylori infection, neurologic injury, trauma, NSAID use, mechanical ventilation, shock and sepsis. Histamine subtype 2 receptor antagonists (58·4%) and proton pump inhibitors (39·6%) were the most frequently chosen agents. No consensus was reached about whether either class is associated with clostridium difficile infection or nosocomial pneumonia. Reasons to discontinue therapy included clinically improved patient status (73·1%), extubation (68·2%), reversal of 'nil-by-mouth' (68·6%) and transfer to a non-ICU setting (67·8%).
Considerable variability exists in the perceptions surrounding risk factors for SRMB and prescribing patterns for SUP therapy likely because limited or conflicting data are available addressing these issues. Opportunities exist to educate prescribers and conduct research about the pathologic cause and risk factors for SRMB, the preferred class of agents, and the appropriate discontinuation of therapy.
不同机构之间以及开处方者之间,在何时开始应激性溃疡预防(SUP)、选择何种药物(包括剂量和频率)及其依据,以及关于治疗升级或停药的决策等方面做法各异。本次调查的目的是评估开处方者对应激性黏膜出血(SRMB)风险评估的看法以及SUP的实践模式。
采用美国危重病医学会的成员名单,对800名美国重症监护开处方者进行横断面调查。对特定陈述的认同程度采用九点李克特量表进行评分。
在712名符合条件的受访者中,245人(34.4%)完成了问卷。受访者主要是在成人内科或外科(59.2%)重症监护病房工作的主治医师(81.2%)。110名(44.9%)受访者认为黏膜缺血是SRMB的病理生理原因。受访者一致认为SRMB的风险因素包括急性肝衰竭、使用抗凝剂、烧伤面积>35%、凝血功能障碍、未进行肠内营养、近期胃十二指肠溃疡、使用皮质类固醇、幽门螺杆菌感染、神经损伤、创伤、使用非甾体抗炎药、机械通气、休克和脓毒症。组胺H2受体拮抗剂(58.4%)和质子泵抑制剂(39.6%)是最常选用的药物。对于这两类药物是否与艰难梭菌感染或医院获得性肺炎相关,未达成共识。停药的原因包括患者临床状况改善(73.1%)、拔管(68.2%)、“禁食”解除(68.6%)以及转至非重症监护病房(67.8%)。
对于SRMB的风险因素和SUP治疗的处方模式,人们的看法存在相当大的差异,这可能是因为解决这些问题的数据有限或相互矛盾。有机会对开处方者进行教育,并开展关于SRMB的病理原因和风险因素、首选药物类别以及适当停药的研究。