Prevalence and predictors of confirmed infection in patients receiving empiric antimicrobials in the intensive care unit: a retrospective cohort study

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Luis Carlos Maia Cardozo Júnior , Larissa Bianchini , Jakeline Neves Giovanetti , Luiz Marcelo Almeida de Araújo , Yuri de Albuquerque Pessoa dos Santos , Bruno Adler Maccagnan Pinheiro Besen , Marcelo Park
{"title":"Prevalence and predictors of confirmed infection in patients receiving empiric antimicrobials in the intensive care unit: a retrospective cohort study","authors":"Luis Carlos Maia Cardozo Júnior ,&nbsp;Larissa Bianchini ,&nbsp;Jakeline Neves Giovanetti ,&nbsp;Luiz Marcelo Almeida de Araújo ,&nbsp;Yuri de Albuquerque Pessoa dos Santos ,&nbsp;Bruno Adler Maccagnan Pinheiro Besen ,&nbsp;Marcelo Park","doi":"10.1016/j.bjane.2024.844567","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Infection diagnosis in Intensive Care Units (ICUs) is a challenge given the spectrum of conditions that present with systemic inflammation, the illness severity and the delay and imprecision of existing diagnostic methods. We hence sought to analyze the prevalence and predictors of confirmed infection after empirical antimicrobials during ICU stay.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>retrospective cohort of prospectively collected ICU data in an academic tertiary hospital in São Paulo, Brazil. We included all adult patients given a new empirical antimicrobial during their ICU stay. We excluded patients using prophylactic or microbiologically guided antimicrobials. Primary outcome was infection status, defined as confirmed, probable, possible, or discarded. In a multivariable analysis, we explored variables associated with confirmed infection.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>After screening 1721 patients admitted to the ICU from November 2017 to November 2022, we identified 398 new antimicrobial prescriptions in 341 patients. After exclusions, 243 antimicrobial prescriptions for 206 patients were included. Infection was classified as confirmed in 61 (25.1%) prescriptions, probable in 39 (16.0%), possible in 103 (42.4%), and discarded in 40 (16.5%). The only factor associated with infection was deltaSOFA (OR = 1.18, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.36, p = 0.022).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Suspected infection in the ICU is frequently not confirmed. Clinicians should be aware of the need to avoid premature closure and revise diagnosis after microbiological results. Development and implementation of new tools for faster infection diagnosis and guiding of antimicrobial prescription should be a research priority.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":32356,"journal":{"name":"Brazilian Journal of Anesthesiology","volume":"75 1","pages":"Article 844567"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Brazilian Journal of Anesthesiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0104001424000897","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Infection diagnosis in Intensive Care Units (ICUs) is a challenge given the spectrum of conditions that present with systemic inflammation, the illness severity and the delay and imprecision of existing diagnostic methods. We hence sought to analyze the prevalence and predictors of confirmed infection after empirical antimicrobials during ICU stay.

Methods

retrospective cohort of prospectively collected ICU data in an academic tertiary hospital in São Paulo, Brazil. We included all adult patients given a new empirical antimicrobial during their ICU stay. We excluded patients using prophylactic or microbiologically guided antimicrobials. Primary outcome was infection status, defined as confirmed, probable, possible, or discarded. In a multivariable analysis, we explored variables associated with confirmed infection.

Results

After screening 1721 patients admitted to the ICU from November 2017 to November 2022, we identified 398 new antimicrobial prescriptions in 341 patients. After exclusions, 243 antimicrobial prescriptions for 206 patients were included. Infection was classified as confirmed in 61 (25.1%) prescriptions, probable in 39 (16.0%), possible in 103 (42.4%), and discarded in 40 (16.5%). The only factor associated with infection was deltaSOFA (OR = 1.18, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.36, p = 0.022).

Conclusion

Suspected infection in the ICU is frequently not confirmed. Clinicians should be aware of the need to avoid premature closure and revise diagnosis after microbiological results. Development and implementation of new tools for faster infection diagnosis and guiding of antimicrobial prescription should be a research priority.
重症监护病房接受经验性抗菌药物治疗的患者确诊感染的发生率和预测因素:一项回顾性队列研究。
背景:重症监护病房(ICU)中的感染诊断是一项挑战,因为全身炎症的病症范围广、病情严重、现有诊断方法的延迟和不精确。因此,我们试图分析在重症监护室住院期间使用经验性抗菌药后确诊感染的发生率和预测因素。方法:对巴西圣保罗一家学术性三甲医院前瞻性收集的重症监护室数据进行回顾性队列分析。我们纳入了所有在重症监护室住院期间使用了新经验性抗菌药物的成人患者。我们排除了使用预防性或微生物指导性抗菌药物的患者。主要结果是感染状态,定义为确诊、可能、可能或放弃。在一项多变量分析中,我们探讨了与确诊感染相关的变量:在对 2017 年 11 月至 2022 年 11 月期间入住重症监护室的 1721 名患者进行筛查后,我们在 341 名患者中发现了 398 个新的抗菌药物处方。排除后,纳入了 206 名患者的 243 份抗菌药物处方。61张处方(25.1%)被归类为确诊感染,39张(16.0%)被归类为可能感染,103张(42.4%)被归类为可能感染,40张(16.5%)被归类为放弃感染。唯一与感染相关的因素是 deltaSOFA(OR = 1.18,95% CI 1.02 至 1.36,p = 0.022):结论:重症监护病房中的疑似感染经常得不到证实。结论:重症监护室中的疑似感染经常得不到确诊,临床医生应意识到避免过早结案的必要性,并在微生物学结果出来后对诊断进行修订。开发和实施新工具以加快感染诊断和指导抗菌药物处方应成为研究重点。
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
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
88
审稿时长
68 days
×
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