Department of Surgery, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, Kansas, USA.
Department of Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA.
Surg Infect (Larchmt). 2024 Mar;25(2):109-115. doi: 10.1089/sur.2023.310. Epub 2024 Jan 22.
The practice of rapidly initiating antibiotic therapy for patients with suspected infection has recently been criticized yet remains commonplace. Provider comfort level has been an understudied aspect of this practice. We hypothesized that there would be no significant differences in provider comfort level between the two treatment groups. We prospectively surveyed critical care intensivists who provided care for patients enrolled in the Trial of Antibiotic Restraint in Presumed Pneumonia (TARPP), which was a multicenter cluster-randomized crossover trial that evaluated an immediate antibiotic initiation protocol compared with a protocol of specimen-initiated antibiotic initiation in ventilated patients with suspected new-onset pneumonia. At the end of each enrollment arm, physicians at each center were surveyed regarding their overall comfort level with the recently completed treatment arm, and perception of adherence. Both a paired and unpaired analysis was performed. We collected 51 survey responses from 31 unique participants. Providers perceived a higher rate of adherence to the immediate initiation arm than the specimen-initiated arm (Always Adherent: 37.5% vs. 11.1%; p = 0.045). Providers were less comfortable waiting for objective evidence of infection in the specimen-initiated arm than with starting antibiotic agents immediately (Very Comfortable: 83.3% vs. 40.7%; p = 0.004). For the smaller paired analysis, there was no longer a difference in comfort level. There may be differences in provider comfort levels and perceptions of adherence when considering two different antibiotic initiation strategies for suspected pneumonia in ventilated patients. These findings should be considered when planning future studies.
快速启动疑似感染患者抗生素治疗的做法最近受到了批评,但仍很常见。提供者的舒适水平一直是这种做法中一个研究不足的方面。我们假设在两种治疗组之间,提供者的舒适水平不会有显著差异。我们前瞻性地调查了为参与疑似肺炎抗生素限制试验(TARPP)的患者提供治疗的重症监护医生,该试验是一项多中心集群随机交叉试验,评估了立即开始抗生素治疗的方案与对疑似新发病例肺炎的呼吸机患者进行标本启动抗生素治疗的方案相比。在每个入组臂结束时,每个中心的医生被调查他们对最近完成的治疗臂的总体舒适程度以及对依从性的看法。进行了配对和非配对分析。我们从 31 名独特的参与者中收集了 51 份调查回复。提供者认为立即开始治疗组的依从率高于标本启动治疗组(始终依从:37.5% vs. 11.1%;p=0.045)。与立即开始使用抗生素药物相比,提供者在标本启动治疗组等待感染的客观证据时不太舒适(非常舒适:83.3% vs. 40.7%;p=0.004)。对于较小的配对分析,舒适度水平不再存在差异。在考虑两种不同的疑似肺炎呼吸机患者抗生素启动策略时,提供者的舒适水平和对依从性的看法可能存在差异。在规划未来研究时,应考虑这些发现。