1Memorial University of Newfoundland Department of Clinical Epidemiology,St John's,Newfoundland,Canada.
2Memorial University of Newfoundland Department of Medicine,St John's,Newfoundland,Canada; Canada A1B3V6 (
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2018 Jul;39(7):814-819. doi: 10.1017/ice.2018.100. Epub 2018 May 28.
DESIGNWe conducted a randomized, parallel, unblinded, superiority trial of a laboratory reporting intervention designed to reduce antibiotic treatment of asymptomatic bacteriuria (ASB).METHODSResults of positive urine cultures from 110 consecutive inpatients at 2 urban acute-care hospitals were randomized to standard report (control) or modified report (intervention). The standard report included bacterial count, bacterial identification, and antibiotic susceptibility information including drug dosage and cost. The modified report stated: "This POSITIVE urine culture may represent asymptomatic bacteriuria or urinary tract infection. If urinary tract infection is suspected clinically, please call the microbiology laboratory … for identification and susceptibility results." We used the following exclusion criteria: age <18 years, pregnancy, presence of an indwelling urinary catheter, samples from patients already on antibiotics, neutropenia, or admission to an intensive care unit. The primary efficacy outcome was the proportion of appropriate antibiotic therapy prescribed.RESULTSAccording to our intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis, the proportion of appropriate treatment (urinary tract infection treated plus ASB not treated) was higher in the modified arm than in the standard arm: 44 of 55 (80.0%) versus 29 of 55 (52.7%), respectively (absolute difference, -27.3%; RR, 0.42; P = .002; number needed to report for benefit, 3.7).CONCLUSIONSModified reporting resulted in a significant reduction in inappropriate antibiotic treatment without an increase in adverse events. Safety should be further assessed in a large effectiveness trial before implementationTRIAL REGISTRATION. clinicaltrials.gov#NCT02797613Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2018;814-819.
设计 我们进行了一项随机、平行、非盲、优势试验,旨在评估一种旨在减少无症状菌尿(ASB)抗生素治疗的实验室报告干预措施。
方法 在 2 家城市急症护理医院的 110 例连续住院患者中,对阳性尿液培养结果进行随机分组,分为标准报告(对照组)或改良报告(干预组)。标准报告包括细菌计数、细菌鉴定和抗生素药敏信息,包括药物剂量和成本。改良报告指出:“此阳性尿液培养可能代表无症状菌尿或尿路感染。如果临床上怀疑尿路感染,请致电微生物实验室……以获取鉴定和药敏结果。”我们使用了以下排除标准:年龄<18 岁、怀孕、留置导尿管、已接受抗生素治疗的患者样本、中性粒细胞减少症或入住重症监护病房。主要疗效结局是适当抗生素治疗的比例。
结果 根据我们的意向治疗(ITT)分析,改良组中适当治疗(尿路感染治疗加 ASB 未治疗)的比例高于标准组:改良组 55 例中有 44 例(80.0%),标准组 55 例中有 29 例(52.7%)(绝对差异,-27.3%;RR,0.42;P =.002;需要报告的受益人数,3.7)。
结论 改良报告导致不适当抗生素治疗的显著减少,而没有增加不良事件。在实施前,应在一项大型有效性试验中进一步评估安全性。
试验注册。clinicaltrials.gov#NCT02797613 感染控制医院流行病学 2018;814-819.