Esplund Jayda N, Taylor Alex D, Stone Tyler J, Palavecino Elizabeth L, Kilic Abdullah, Luther Vera P, Ohl Christopher A, Beardsley James R
Department of Pharmacy, Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.
Section on Infectious Diseases, Department of Internal Medicine, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.
Antimicrob Steward Healthc Epidemiol. 2023 Jan 9;3(1):e5. doi: 10.1017/ash.2022.358. eCollection 2023.
To evaluate the clinical impact of the BioFire FilmArray Pneumonia Panel (PNA panel) in critically ill patients.
Single-center, preintervention and postintervention retrospective cohort study.
Tertiary-care academic medical center.
Adult ICU patients.
Patients with quantitative bacterial cultures obtained by bronchoalveolar lavage or tracheal aspirate either before (January-March 2021, preintervention period) or after (January-March 2022, postintervention period) implementation of the PNA panel were randomly screened until 25 patients per study month (75 in each cohort) who met the study criteria were included. Antibiotic use from the day of culture collection through day 5 was compared.
The primary outcome of median time to first antibiotic change based on microbiologic data was 50 hours before the intervention versus 21 hours after the intervention ( = .0006). Also, 56 postintervention regimens (75%) were eligible for change based on PNA panel results; actual change occurred in 30 regimens (54%). Median antibiotic days of therapy (DOTs) were 8 before the intervention versus 6 after the intervention ( = .07). For the patients with antibiotic changes made based on PNA panel results, the median time to first antibiotic change was 10 hours. For patients who were initially on inadequate therapy, time to adequate therapy was 67 hours before the intervention versus 37 hours after the intervention ( = .27).
The PNA panel was associated with decreased time to first antibiotic change and fewer antibiotic DOTs. Its impact may have been larger if a higher percentage of potential antibiotic changes had been implemented. The PNA panel is a promising tool to enhance antibiotic stewardship.
评估BioFire FilmArray肺炎检测板(PNA检测板)对重症患者的临床影响。
单中心、干预前和干预后回顾性队列研究。
三级医疗学术医学中心。
成年ICU患者。
对在实施PNA检测板之前(2021年1月至3月,干预前期)或之后(2022年1月至3月,干预后期)通过支气管肺泡灌洗或气管抽吸获得定量细菌培养物的患者进行随机筛查,直至每个研究月纳入25例符合研究标准的患者(每个队列75例)。比较从培养物采集日至第5天的抗生素使用情况。
基于微生物学数据的首次抗生素更换中位时间这一主要结局在干预前为50小时,干预后为21小时(P = 0.0006)。此外,56种干预后治疗方案(75%)根据PNA检测板结果符合更换条件;实际更换发生在30种方案中(54%)。抗生素治疗中位天数(DOTs)在干预前为8天,干预后为6天(P = 0.07)。对于根据PNA检测板结果进行抗生素更换的患者,首次抗生素更换中位时间为10小时。对于最初治疗不充分的患者,达到充分治疗的时间在干预前为67小时,干预后为37小时(P = 0.27)。
PNA检测板与首次抗生素更换时间缩短和抗生素DOTs减少相关。如果实施更高比例的潜在抗生素更换,其影响可能会更大。PNA检测板是加强抗生素管理的一个有前景的工具。