Clinical Impact of Oral Step-Down Therapy for Gram-Negative Bacteremia: A Retrospective Study.

Nhi Nguyen, Ashitha Jayachandran, Minhhang Mui, Kelsey Olson
{"title":"Clinical Impact of Oral Step-Down Therapy for Gram-Negative Bacteremia: A Retrospective Study.","authors":"Nhi Nguyen,&nbsp;Ashitha Jayachandran,&nbsp;Minhhang Mui,&nbsp;Kelsey Olson","doi":"10.36518/2689-0216.1399","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In recent years, there has been a growing body of evidence that supports oral step-down therapy for the treatment of gram-negative bacteremia. The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes for hospitalized patients who received intravenous-only (IV-only) therapy versus oral step-down therapy with low, moderate, and highly bioavailable antimicrobials for the treatment of gram-negative bacteremia.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this retrospective, single-center, observational study, we examined data from adult patients hospitalized with gram-negative bacteremia in a 1-year period. Data analysis was performed using information collected from electronic medical records and a clinical surveillance system.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 199 patients were included in this study. Patients in the IV-only group had higher Charlson comorbidity index scores at baseline and higher rates of intensive care unit admission while bacteremic (<i>P</i> = .0096 and .0026, respectively). The primary outcome of 30-day all-cause mortality was significantly lower in the oral step-down group (<i>P</i> < .0001). Secondary outcomes of 30-day bacteremia recurrence, line-associated complications, and hospital length of stay were similar between groups. The total duration of antibiotic therapy was one day longer for oral step-down patients (<i>P</i> = .0015) and the estimated cost of antibiotic therapy was significantly lower in this group (<i>P</i> < .00001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In this retrospective study, oral step-down therapy was not associated with increased 30- day all-cause mortality. Oral step-down therapy was also more cost-effective than IV-only therapy, while both groups had similar bacteremia recurrence within 30 days.</p>","PeriodicalId":73198,"journal":{"name":"HCA healthcare journal of medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10324867/pdf/26890216_vol4_iss2_119.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"HCA healthcare journal of medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36518/2689-0216.1399","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: In recent years, there has been a growing body of evidence that supports oral step-down therapy for the treatment of gram-negative bacteremia. The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes for hospitalized patients who received intravenous-only (IV-only) therapy versus oral step-down therapy with low, moderate, and highly bioavailable antimicrobials for the treatment of gram-negative bacteremia.

Methods: In this retrospective, single-center, observational study, we examined data from adult patients hospitalized with gram-negative bacteremia in a 1-year period. Data analysis was performed using information collected from electronic medical records and a clinical surveillance system.

Results: A total of 199 patients were included in this study. Patients in the IV-only group had higher Charlson comorbidity index scores at baseline and higher rates of intensive care unit admission while bacteremic (P = .0096 and .0026, respectively). The primary outcome of 30-day all-cause mortality was significantly lower in the oral step-down group (P < .0001). Secondary outcomes of 30-day bacteremia recurrence, line-associated complications, and hospital length of stay were similar between groups. The total duration of antibiotic therapy was one day longer for oral step-down patients (P = .0015) and the estimated cost of antibiotic therapy was significantly lower in this group (P < .00001).

Conclusion: In this retrospective study, oral step-down therapy was not associated with increased 30- day all-cause mortality. Oral step-down therapy was also more cost-effective than IV-only therapy, while both groups had similar bacteremia recurrence within 30 days.

口服降压治疗革兰氏阴性菌血症的临床影响:一项回顾性研究。
背景:近年来,越来越多的证据支持口服降压疗法治疗革兰氏阴性菌血症。本研究的目的是比较住院患者接受静脉注射治疗与口服降压治疗(低、中、高生物利用度抗菌剂)治疗革兰氏阴性菌血症的结果。方法:在这项回顾性、单中心、观察性研究中,我们检查了1年内住院的革兰氏阴性菌血症成年患者的数据。利用从电子病历和临床监测系统收集的信息进行数据分析。结果:本研究共纳入199例患者。仅iv组患者在基线时的Charlson合并症指数评分较高,在菌血症时的重症监护病房入院率较高(P分别为0.0096和0.0026)。口服降压组30天全因死亡率的主要终点显著降低(P < 0.0001)。30天菌血症复发、线相关并发症和住院时间的次要结局在两组之间相似。口服降压患者的抗生素治疗总持续时间延长1天(P = 0.0015),该组抗生素治疗的估计费用显著降低(P < 0.00001)。结论:在这项回顾性研究中,口服降压治疗与30天全因死亡率增加无关。口服降压治疗也比单纯静脉注射治疗更具成本效益,而两组在30天内的菌血症复发相似。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信