Real-word utility of procalcitonin in patients hospitalized with community-acquired pneumonia: A matched cohort study.

IF 3 4区 医学 Q2 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Dan Ilges, Dylan Kosaski, Maria Teresa Seville, Alyssa K McGary, John C O'Horo, Christine L Snozek, Ryan W Stevens, Aditya Shah
{"title":"Real-word utility of procalcitonin in patients hospitalized with community-acquired pneumonia: A matched cohort study.","authors":"Dan Ilges, Dylan Kosaski, Maria Teresa Seville, Alyssa K McGary, John C O'Horo, Christine L Snozek, Ryan W Stevens, Aditya Shah","doi":"10.1017/ice.2025.35","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To retrospectively observe procalcitonin (PCT) and antibiotic ordering practices in patients hospitalized with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP).</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Retrospective, exact matched, multicenter cohort study from October 1, 2018 - March 31, 2023.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>All hospitals across the Mayo Clinic Enterprise.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Adult patients with CAP, identified using pneumonia diagnosis codes and receipt of systemic antibiotics with an indication of \"respiratory tract infection\" within 48 hours of hospitalization.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PCT testing within the first 7 days of hospitalization was compared to non-PCT care (nPCT). The primary outcomes were treatment duration, antibiotic days of therapy (DOT), and length of stay (LOS).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>15364 patients met inclusion criteria. PCT testing occurred in 42.4% (6515/15364) of encounters, totaling 8214 PCT results. 12880 unique patient encounters were matched 1:1, 6440 in each group. Treatment duration was longer in the PCT group compared to the nPCT group (5.1 vs 4.6 days, respectively, <i>P</i> < 0.001). Patients in the PCT group also received more DOT (8.6 vs 7.6 DOT, <i>P</i> < 0.001) and had a longer LOS (6.8 vs 5.9 days, <i>P</i> < 0.001), respectively. There was no difference in 30-day all-cause mortality or <i>C. difficile</i> infection between groups. In a sensitivity analysis of nPCT patients compared to those with a peak value <0.25 ng/mL (i.e. normal result) there was no difference in treatment duration (4.6 days nPCT vs 4.7 days normal PCT, <i>P</i> = 0.104) or LOS (5.9 days nPCT vs 6.0 days normal PCT, <i>P</i> = 0.134).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>PCT testing in patients hospitalized with CAP was not associated with reduced antimicrobial utilization, LOS, or 30-day all-cause mortality.</p>","PeriodicalId":13663,"journal":{"name":"Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology","volume":" ","pages":"1-7"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ice.2025.35","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To retrospectively observe procalcitonin (PCT) and antibiotic ordering practices in patients hospitalized with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP).

Design: Retrospective, exact matched, multicenter cohort study from October 1, 2018 - March 31, 2023.

Setting: All hospitals across the Mayo Clinic Enterprise.

Participants: Adult patients with CAP, identified using pneumonia diagnosis codes and receipt of systemic antibiotics with an indication of "respiratory tract infection" within 48 hours of hospitalization.

Methods: PCT testing within the first 7 days of hospitalization was compared to non-PCT care (nPCT). The primary outcomes were treatment duration, antibiotic days of therapy (DOT), and length of stay (LOS).

Results: 15364 patients met inclusion criteria. PCT testing occurred in 42.4% (6515/15364) of encounters, totaling 8214 PCT results. 12880 unique patient encounters were matched 1:1, 6440 in each group. Treatment duration was longer in the PCT group compared to the nPCT group (5.1 vs 4.6 days, respectively, P < 0.001). Patients in the PCT group also received more DOT (8.6 vs 7.6 DOT, P < 0.001) and had a longer LOS (6.8 vs 5.9 days, P < 0.001), respectively. There was no difference in 30-day all-cause mortality or C. difficile infection between groups. In a sensitivity analysis of nPCT patients compared to those with a peak value <0.25 ng/mL (i.e. normal result) there was no difference in treatment duration (4.6 days nPCT vs 4.7 days normal PCT, P = 0.104) or LOS (5.9 days nPCT vs 6.0 days normal PCT, P = 0.134).

Conclusion: PCT testing in patients hospitalized with CAP was not associated with reduced antimicrobial utilization, LOS, or 30-day all-cause mortality.

降钙素原在社区获得性肺炎住院患者中的实际应用:一项匹配队列研究。
目的:回顾性观察社区获得性肺炎(CAP)住院患者降钙素原(PCT)和抗生素订购情况。设计:回顾性、精确匹配、多中心队列研究,时间为2018年10月1日至2023年3月31日。环境:梅奥企业诊所的所有医院。参与者:成年CAP患者,在住院48小时内使用肺炎诊断代码识别并接受全身性抗生素治疗,有“呼吸道感染”指征。方法:将住院前7天的PCT检测与非PCT治疗(nPCT)进行比较。主要结局是治疗时间、抗生素治疗天数(DOT)和住院时间(LOS)。结果:15364例患者符合纳入标准。42.4%(6515/15364)的病例进行了PCT检测,共有8214例PCT检测结果。12880例独特的患者遭遇1:1匹配,每组6440例。与nPCT组相比,PCT组的治疗时间更长(分别为5.1天和4.6天,P < 0.001)。PCT组患者接受的DOT也更多(8.6 vs 7.6 DOT, P < 0.001), LOS也更长(6.8 vs 5.9天,P < 0.001)。组间30天全因死亡率和艰难梭菌感染无差异。在nPCT患者与峰值P = 0.104或LOS患者的敏感性分析中(nPCT 5.9天vs正常PCT 6.0天,P = 0.134)。结论:CAP住院患者的PCT检测与抗菌药物使用率、LOS或30天全因死亡率的降低无关。
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
6.40
自引率
6.70%
发文量
289
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology provides original, peer-reviewed scientific articles for anyone involved with an infection control or epidemiology program in a hospital or healthcare facility. Written by infection control practitioners and epidemiologists and guided by an editorial board composed of the nation''s leaders in the field, ICHE provides a critical forum for this vital information.
×
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