Carlsen Sean, Krall Scott P, Xu K Tom, Tomanec Alainya, Farias Daylon, Richman Peter
Department of Emergency Medicine, CHRISTUS Health/Texas A&M Health Science Center, 600 Elizabeth Street, Corpus Christi, TX, 78404, USA.
Department of Family & Community Medicine and Department of Surgery, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, School of Medicine, Lubbock, TX, 79430, USA.
BMC Emerg Med. 2019 Sep 5;19(1):50. doi: 10.1186/s12873-019-0264-z.
Data for hospital antibiograms are typically compiled from all patients, regardless of disposition, demographics and other comorbidities.
We hypothesized that the sensitivity patterns for urinary pathogens would differ significantly from the hospital antibiogram in patients that were discharged from the emergency department (ED).
We evaluated a retrospective cohort of all adult patients with positive urine cultures treated in the 2016 calendar year at an inner-city academic ED. Positive urine cultures defined by our institution's microbiology department. Investigators conducted a structured review of an electronic medical record (EMR) to collect demographic, historical and microbiology records. We utilized a one-sample test of proportion to compare the sensitivity of each organism for discharged patients to the hospital published antibiogram. Alpha set at 0.05.
During the study period, 414 patients were discharged from the ED and found to have positive urine cultures; 20% age > 60 years old, 85% female, 79% Hispanic, 33% diabetic. The most common organisms was E. coli (78%). E. coli was sensitive to Trimethoprim-Sulfamethoxazole for 59% vs. 58% in our antibiogram (p = 0.77), Ciprofloxacin 81% vs. 69% (p < 0. 001), Nitrofurantoin 96% vs 95%; (p = 0.25). K. pneumoniae was sensitive to Trimethoprim-Sulfamethoxazole 87% vs. 80% in our antibiogram (p = 0.26), Ciprofloxacin 100% vs. 92% (p = 0.077), Nitrofurantoin 86% vs 41% (p < 0.001).
For our predominantly Hispanic study group with a high prevalence of diabetes, we found that our hospital antibiogram had relatively good value in guiding antibiotic therapy though for some organism/antibiotic combinations sensitivities were higher than expected.
医院抗菌谱数据通常是从所有患者中收集的,无论其出院情况、人口统计学特征和其他合并症如何。
我们假设急诊科(ED)出院患者尿路病原体的敏感性模式与医院抗菌谱存在显著差异。
我们评估了2016年在市中心一家学术性急诊科接受治疗的所有成年尿培养阳性患者的回顾性队列。尿培养阳性由我们机构的微生物学部门定义。研究人员对电子病历(EMR)进行了结构化审查,以收集人口统计学、病史和微生物学记录。我们使用单样本比例检验来比较出院患者中每种病原体对医院公布的抗菌谱的敏感性。设定α为0.05。
在研究期间,414例患者从急诊科出院,尿培养呈阳性;20%年龄>60岁,85%为女性,79%为西班牙裔,33%患有糖尿病。最常见的病原体是大肠杆菌(78%)。大肠杆菌对甲氧苄啶-磺胺甲恶唑的敏感性在我们的抗菌谱中为59%,而公布的抗菌谱中为58%(p = 0.77);对环丙沙星的敏感性分别为81%和69%(p < 0.001);对呋喃妥因的敏感性分别为96%和95%(p = 0.25)。肺炎克雷伯菌对甲氧苄啶-磺胺甲恶唑的敏感性在我们的抗菌谱中为87%,公布的抗菌谱中为80%(p = 0.26);对环丙沙星的敏感性分别为100%和92%(p = 0.077);对呋喃妥因的敏感性分别为86%和41%(p < 0.001)。
对于我们以西班牙裔为主且糖尿病患病率高的研究组,我们发现医院抗菌谱在指导抗生素治疗方面具有相对较好的价值,尽管对于某些病原体/抗生素组合,敏感性高于预期。