Suppr超能文献

2020/2021年德国和奥地利儿科肿瘤学与血液学中的抗菌药物使用情况:一项采用多步骤定性判定流程的横断面多中心现患率研究

Antimicrobial use in pediatric oncology and hematology in Germany and Austria, 2020/2021: a cross-sectional, multi-center point-prevalence study with a multi-step qualitative adjudication process.

作者信息

Papan Cihan, Reifenrath Katharina, Last Katharina, Attarbaschi Andishe, Graf Norbert, Groll Andreas H, Hübner Johannes, Laws Hans-Jürgen, Lehrnbecher Thomas, Liese Johannes G, Martin Luise, Tenenbaum Tobias, Vieth Simon, von Both Ulrich, Wagenpfeil Gudrun, Weichert Stefan, Hufnagel Markus, Simon Arne

机构信息

Center for Infectious Diseases, Institute of Medical Microbiology and Hygiene, Saarland University, Homburg, Germany.

Institute for Hygiene and Public Health, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany.

出版信息

Lancet Reg Health Eur. 2023 Mar 1;28:100599. doi: 10.1016/j.lanepe.2023.100599. eCollection 2023 May.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Due to the high risk of severe infection among pediatric hematology and oncology patients, antimicrobial use is particularly high. With our study, we quantitatively and qualitatively evaluated, based on institutional standards and national guidelines, antimicrobial usage by employing a point-prevalence survey with a multi-step, expert panel approach. We analyzed reasons for inappropriate antimicrobial usage.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study was conducted at 30 pediatric hematology and oncology centers in 2020 and 2021. Centers affiliated to the German Society for Pediatric Oncology and Hematology were invited to join, and an existing institutional standard was a prerequisite to participate. We included hematologic/oncologic inpatients under 19 years old, who had a systemic antimicrobial treatment on the day of the point prevalence survey. In addition to a one-day, point-prevalence survey, external experts individually assessed the appropriateness of each therapy. This step was followed by an expert panel adjudication based upon the participating centers' institutional standards, as well as upon national guidelines. We analyzed antimicrobial prevalence rate, along with the rate of appropriate, inappropriate, and indeterminate antimicrobial therapies with regard to institutional and national guidelines. We compared the results of academic and non-academic centers, and performed a multinomial logistic regression using center- and patient-related data to identify variables that predict inappropriate therapy.

FINDINGS

At the time of the study, a total of 342 patients were hospitalized at 30 hospitals, of whom 320 were included for the calculation of the antimicrobial prevalence rate. The overall antimicrobial prevalence rate was 44.4% (142/320; range 11.1-78.6%) with a median antimicrobial prevalence rate per center of 44.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] 35.9-49.9). Antimicrobial prevalence rate was significantly higher (p < 0.001) at academic centers (median 50.0%; 95% CI 41.2-55.2) compared to non-academic centers (median 20.0%; 95% CI 11.0-32.4). After expert panel adjudication, 33.8% (48/142) of all therapies were labelled inappropriate based upon institutional standards, with a higher rate (47.9% [68/142]) when national guidelines were taken into consideration. The most frequent reasons for inappropriate therapy were incorrect dosage (26.2% [37/141]) and (de-)escalation/spectrum-related errors (20.6% [29/141]). Multinomial, logistic regression yielded the number of antimicrobial drugs (odds ratio, OR, 3.13, 95% CI 1.76-5.54, p < 0.001), the diagnosis febrile neutropenia (OR 0.18, 95% CI 0.06-0.51, p = 0.0015), and an existing pediatric antimicrobial stewardship program (OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.15-0.84, p = 0.019) as predictors of inappropriate therapy. Our analysis revealed no evidence of a difference between academic and non-academic centers regarding appropriate usage.

INTERPRETATION

Our study revealed there to be high levels of antimicrobial usage at German and Austrian pediatric oncology and hematology centers with a significant higher number at academic centers. Incorrect dosing was shown to be the most frequent reason for inappropriate usage. Diagnosis of febrile neutropenia and antimicrobial stewardship programs were associated with a lower likelihood of inappropriate therapy. These findings suggest the importance of febrile neutropenia guidelines and guidelines compliance, as well as the need for regular antibiotic stewardship counselling at pediatric oncology and hematology centers.

FUNDING

European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Pädiatrische Infektiologie, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Krankenhaushygiene, Stiftung Kreissparkasse Saarbrücken.

摘要

背景

由于儿科血液学和肿瘤学患者发生严重感染的风险较高,抗菌药物的使用尤其频繁。在本研究中,我们基于机构标准和国家指南,采用多步骤专家小组方法进行现患率调查,对抗菌药物的使用进行了定量和定性评估。我们分析了抗菌药物使用不当的原因。

方法

这项横断面研究于2020年和2021年在30家儿科血液学和肿瘤学中心开展。德国儿科肿瘤学和血液学协会下属的中心受邀参与,参与的前提是要有现行的机构标准。我们纳入了19岁以下的血液学/肿瘤学住院患者,这些患者在现患率调查当天接受了全身性抗菌治疗。除了为期一天的现患率调查外,外部专家还对每种治疗的适宜性进行了单独评估。在此步骤之后,由专家小组根据参与中心的机构标准以及国家指南进行裁决。我们分析了抗菌药物现患率,以及根据机构和国家指南确定的适宜、不当和不确定抗菌治疗的比例。我们比较了学术中心和非学术中心的结果,并使用中心和患者相关数据进行多项逻辑回归,以确定预测不当治疗的变量。

结果

在研究期间,30家医院共有342例患者住院,其中320例纳入抗菌药物现患率的计算。总体抗菌药物现患率为44.4%(142/320;范围11.1 - 78.6%),每个中心的抗菌药物现患率中位数为44.5%(95%置信区间[CI] 35.9 - 49.9)。与非学术中心(中位数20.0%;95% CI 11.0 - 32.4)相比,学术中心的抗菌药物现患率显著更高(p < 0.001)(中位数50.0%;95% CI 41.2 - 55.2)。经过专家小组裁决,根据机构标准,所有治疗中有33.8%(48/142)被判定为不当,若考虑国家指南,这一比例更高(47.9%[68/142])。治疗不当最常见的原因是剂量错误(26.2%[37/141])和(降)阶梯/谱相关错误(20.6%[29/141])。多项逻辑回归得出抗菌药物数量(比值比,OR,3.13,95% CI 1.76 - 5.54,p < 0.001)、发热性中性粒细胞减少症的诊断(OR 0.18,95% CI 0.06 - 0.51,p = 0.0015)以及现有的儿科抗菌药物管理计划(OR 0.35,95% CI 0.15 - 0.84,p = 0.019)是不当治疗的预测因素。我们的分析没有发现学术中心和非学术中心在适宜使用方面存在差异的证据。

解读

我们的研究表明,德国和奥地利的儿科肿瘤学和血液学中心抗菌药物使用水平较高,学术中心的使用量显著更高。剂量错误被证明是使用不当最常见的原因。发热性中性粒细胞减少症的诊断和抗菌药物管理计划与不当治疗的可能性较低相关。这些发现表明了发热性中性粒细胞减少症指南和指南依从性的重要性,以及儿科肿瘤学和血液学中心定期进行抗生素管理咨询服务的必要性。

资助

欧洲临床微生物学和传染病学会、德国儿科传染病学会、德国医院卫生学会、萨尔布吕肯 Kreissparkasse 基金会。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/deb5/10173264/77cc03ffc407/gr1.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验