Commission médicale des anti-infectieux (COMAI) des hôpitaux universitaires Paris centre, Assistance publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, 75014 Paris, France; Service de santé publique, unité de gestion des risques et qualité, hôpitaux universitaires Paris centre, Assistance publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, 75014 Paris, France.
Commission médicale des anti-infectieux (COMAI) des hôpitaux universitaires Paris centre, Assistance publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, 75014 Paris, France; Équipe mobile d'infectiologie, hôpitaux universitaires Paris centre, Assistance publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, 75014 Paris, France.
Med Mal Infect. 2019 May;49(3):187-193. doi: 10.1016/j.medmal.2018.10.002. Epub 2018 Nov 9.
To assess the documentation of the 72-hour antibiotic therapy reassessment in medical records.
One-day prevalence evaluation of curative antibiotic therapies≥72hours. The documentation of the reassessment was defined according to three criteria: (1) "clear" documentation (clinical or microbiological comment associated with a comment on the need to adjust the antibiotic therapy or on the lack of need); (2) "tacit" documentation (only based on a clinical or microbiological comment); (3) no documentation.
We assessed 114 antibiotic therapies in 26 hospital departments. A clear reassessment at 72hours was observed in only 45 (39%) records and 31 (27%) records had no reassessment. The planned duration of treatment was written in 63 (55%) records. At 72hours, among the 71 antibiotic therapies with a microbiological documentation, 69 (97%) were active and 44 (62%) had a narrow spectrum. Among the 48 antibiotic therapies with a broad spectrum on day 1, only 21 (44%) benefited from a de-escalation at 72hours. A clearly recorded reassessment at 72hours was associated with de-escalation (P=0.025) and the prescription of a planned duration of treatment was associated with antibiotic therapy compliance with local or national guidelines (P=0.018).
Although reassessment was observed in 73% of records, it was correctly recorded at 72hours in only 39% of cases. The documentation of the reassessment and the prescription of a planned duration were associated with a better quality of antibiotic prescription (de-escalation, compliance with guidelines) and are relevant indicators for monitoring the proper use of antibiotics.
评估病历中 72 小时抗生素治疗重新评估的记录情况。
对治疗性抗生素治疗≥72 小时的一日患病率进行评估。根据三个标准定义重新评估的记录情况:(1)“明确”记录(附有临床或微生物学评论,并对调整抗生素治疗的必要性或无需调整进行评论);(2)“默示”记录(仅基于临床或微生物学评论);(3)无记录。
我们评估了 26 个科室的 114 种抗生素治疗方案。仅在 45 份(39%)记录中观察到明确的 72 小时重新评估,31 份(27%)记录中没有重新评估。63 份(55%)记录中写明了治疗计划持续时间。在 72 小时时,在 71 种有微生物学记录的抗生素治疗中,有 69 种(97%)仍然有效,44 种(62%)具有窄谱。在第 1 天使用广谱抗生素的 48 种抗生素治疗中,仅 21 种(44%)在 72 小时时进行了降级治疗。72 小时时明确记录的重新评估与降级治疗相关(P=0.025),并且计划持续时间的处方与抗生素治疗符合当地或国家指南相关(P=0.018)。
尽管在 73%的记录中观察到了重新评估,但在仅 39%的病例中正确记录了 72 小时的重新评估。重新评估的记录和计划持续时间的处方与更好的抗生素处方质量(降级治疗、符合指南)相关,是监测抗生素合理使用的相关指标。