Carbapenem Appropriateness in a Rural Facility

IF 0.4 Q4 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
J. Cole
{"title":"Carbapenem Appropriateness in a Rural Facility","authors":"J. Cole","doi":"10.1097/ipc.0000000000001293","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n Inappropriate carbapenem prescribing leads to increased resistance, secondary infections, serious side effects, and wasted resources. A history of penicillin allergy has been identified as a potential trigger for inappropriate carbapenem prescribing. The PEN-FAST score is a validated tool that provides a high negative predictive value for allergic reaction with low scores. The objectives of this study were to determine the proportion of imipenem/cilastatin and meropenem prescriptions deemed appropriate according to published criteria and to evaluate the proportion of penicillin allergies with a low PEN-FAST score.\n \n \n \n A convenience sample of 100 carbapenem prescriptions (imipenem/cilastatin [n = 50] and meropenem [n = 50]) was evaluated with a retrospective chart review. Objective published criteria were used to assign a score of appropriate, suboptimal, or inappropriate. In patients with a history of penicillin allergy, a PEN-FAST score was retrospectively applied. Indications for use and risk factors for resistant infections were also recorded. Analysis was largely descriptive statistics, with a χ2 used to compare drug cohorts in R Studio.\n \n \n \n Prescribing was considered appropriate (25%), suboptimal (20%), and inappropriate (55%) in the combined cohort. Inappropriate prescribing was more common with imipenem/cilastatin (66% vs. 44%, P = 0.03). In 28 patients with a historical penicillin allergy, the PEN-FAST score was 0 (low risk for reaction) in the majority of cases (93%).\n \n \n \n Inappropriate carbapenem prescribing is common at the study facility and may benefit from directed antimicrobial stewardship measures. Implementing the PEN-FAST scoring method may be beneficial in a multifaceted intervention.\n","PeriodicalId":13952,"journal":{"name":"Infectious Diseases in Clinical Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Infectious Diseases in Clinical Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/ipc.0000000000001293","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Inappropriate carbapenem prescribing leads to increased resistance, secondary infections, serious side effects, and wasted resources. A history of penicillin allergy has been identified as a potential trigger for inappropriate carbapenem prescribing. The PEN-FAST score is a validated tool that provides a high negative predictive value for allergic reaction with low scores. The objectives of this study were to determine the proportion of imipenem/cilastatin and meropenem prescriptions deemed appropriate according to published criteria and to evaluate the proportion of penicillin allergies with a low PEN-FAST score. A convenience sample of 100 carbapenem prescriptions (imipenem/cilastatin [n = 50] and meropenem [n = 50]) was evaluated with a retrospective chart review. Objective published criteria were used to assign a score of appropriate, suboptimal, or inappropriate. In patients with a history of penicillin allergy, a PEN-FAST score was retrospectively applied. Indications for use and risk factors for resistant infections were also recorded. Analysis was largely descriptive statistics, with a χ2 used to compare drug cohorts in R Studio. Prescribing was considered appropriate (25%), suboptimal (20%), and inappropriate (55%) in the combined cohort. Inappropriate prescribing was more common with imipenem/cilastatin (66% vs. 44%, P = 0.03). In 28 patients with a historical penicillin allergy, the PEN-FAST score was 0 (low risk for reaction) in the majority of cases (93%). Inappropriate carbapenem prescribing is common at the study facility and may benefit from directed antimicrobial stewardship measures. Implementing the PEN-FAST scoring method may be beneficial in a multifaceted intervention.
农村设施中碳青霉烯的适宜性
不适当的碳青霉烯类药物处方会导致耐药性增加、继发感染、严重副作用和资源浪费。青霉素过敏史已被确定为不适当的碳青霉烯类药物处方的潜在诱因。PEN-FAST评分是一种经过验证的工具,可为低分过敏反应提供高阴性预测值。本研究的目的是根据已公布的标准确定亚胺培南/西司他丁和美罗培南处方的比例,并评估低PEN-FAST评分的青霉素过敏比例。对100个碳青霉烯处方(亚胺培南/西司他丁[n=50]和美罗培南[n=50])的方便样本进行了回顾性图表评估。客观公布的标准用于分配适当、次优或不适当的分数。在有青霉素过敏史的患者中,对PEN-FAST评分进行了回顾性应用。还记录了耐药感染的使用适应症和风险因素。分析主要是描述性统计,χ2用于比较R Studio中的药物队列。在联合队列中,处方被认为是合适的(25%)、次优的(20%)和不合适的(55%)。亚胺培南/西司他丁的处方不恰当更为常见(66%对44%,P=0.03)。在28名有青霉素过敏史的患者中,大多数病例(93%)的PEN-FAST评分为0(反应风险低)。不适当的碳青霉烯类药物处方在研究机构很常见,可能受益于直接的抗菌管理措施。在多方面的干预中,实施PEN-FAST评分方法可能是有益的。
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
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
78
期刊介绍: Medical professionals seeking an infectious diseases journal with true clinical value need look no further than Infectious Diseases in Clinical Practice. Here, clinicians can get full coverage consolidated into one resource, with pertinent new developments presented in a way that makes them easy to apply to patient care. From HIV care delivery to Hepatitis C virus testing…travel and tropical medicine…and infection surveillance, prevention, and control, Infectious Diseases in Clinical Practice delivers the vital information needed to optimally prevent and treat infectious diseases. Indexed/abstracted in: EMBASE, SCOPUS, Current Contents/Clinical Medicine
×
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