Younan Duraid, Griffin Russell, Swain Thomas, Pittet Jean-Francois, Camins Bernard
Division of Acute Care Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama.
Department of Biostatistics, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama.
J Surg Res. 2017 Aug;216:123-128. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2017.04.023. Epub 2017 May 5.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) replaced its old definition for ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) with the ventilator-associated events algorithm in 2013. We sought to compare the outcome of trauma patients meeting the definitions for VAP in the two modules.
Trauma patients with blunt or penetrating injuries and with at least 2 d of ventilator support were identified from the trauma registry from 2013 to 2014. VAP was determined using two methods: (1) VAP as defined by the "old," clinically based NHSN definition and (2) possible VAP as defined by the updated "new" NHSN definition. Cohen's kappa statistic was determined to compare the two definitions for VAP. To compare demographic and clinical outcomes, the chi-square and Student's t-tests were used for categorical and continuous variables, respectively.
From 2013 to 2014, there were 1165 trauma patients admitted who had at least 2 d of ventilator support. Seventy-eight patients (6.6%) met the "new" NHSN definition for possible VAP, 361 patients (30.9%) met the "old" definition of VAP, and 68 patients (5.8%) met both definitions. The kappa statistic between VAP as defined by the "new" and "old" definitions was 0.22 (95% confidence interval, 0.17-0.27). There were no differences in age, gender, race, or injury severity score when comparing patients who met the different definitions. Those satisfying both definitions had longer ventilator support days (P = 0.0009), intensive care unit length of stay (LOS; P = 0.0003), and hospital LOS (P = 0.0344) when compared with those meeting only one definition. There was no difference in mortality for those meeting both and those meeting the old definition for VAP; patients meeting both definitions had higher respiratory rate at arrival (P = 0.0178).
There was no difference in mortality between patients meeting the "old" and "new" NHSN definitions for VAP; those who met "both" definitions had longer ventilator support days, intensive care unit, and hospital LOS.
美国疾病控制与预防中心的国家医疗安全网络(NHSN)于2013年用呼吸机相关事件算法取代了其对呼吸机相关性肺炎(VAP)的旧定义。我们试图比较符合这两个模块中VAP定义的创伤患者的结局。
从2013年至2014年的创伤登记中识别出有钝性或穿透性损伤且至少接受2天机械通气支持的创伤患者。使用两种方法确定VAP:(1)按照基于临床的NHSN“旧”定义所界定的VAP;(2)按照更新后的NHSN“新”定义所界定的可能的VAP。采用Cohen's kappa统计量来比较VAP的两种定义。为比较人口统计学和临床结局,分别对分类变量和连续变量使用卡方检验和学生t检验。
2013年至2014年,有1165例接受至少2天机械通气支持的创伤患者入院。78例患者(6.6%)符合“新”NHSN可能VAP定义,361例患者(30.9%)符合VAP的“旧”定义,68例患者(5.8%)符合两种定义。“新”定义和“旧”定义所界定的VAP之间的kappa统计量为0.22(95%置信区间,0.17 - 0.27)。比较符合不同定义的患者时,在年龄、性别、种族或损伤严重程度评分方面没有差异。与仅符合一种定义的患者相比,符合两种定义的患者机械通气支持天数更长(P = 0.0009)、重症监护病房住院时间(LOS;P = 0.0003)和医院住院时间更长(P = 0.0344)。符合两种定义的患者与符合VAP旧定义的患者在死亡率方面没有差异;符合两种定义的患者入院时呼吸频率更高(P = 0.0178)。
符合VAP的“旧”NHSN定义和“新”NHSN定义的患者在死亡率方面没有差异;符合“两种”定义的患者机械通气支持天数、重症监护病房和医院住院时间更长。