Comparison between monotherapy and combination therapy among inpatients with community-acquired pneumonia

Rike Syahniar, Audia Nizhma Nabila, Dayu Swasti Kharisma, Muhammad Afif Akbar
{"title":"Comparison between monotherapy and combination therapy among inpatients with community-acquired pneumonia","authors":"Rike Syahniar, Audia Nizhma Nabila, Dayu Swasti Kharisma, Muhammad Afif Akbar","doi":"10.20885/jif.vol17.iss1.art6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Pneumonia causes high mortality, hospitalization costs and health services. There is some growing debate regarding the efficacy of different treatment management approaches. The use of certain antibiotic regimens combination and monotherapy have been associated with improved outcomes. Objective: This study aims to determine the effectiveness of monotherapy and combination therapy on length of stay. Method: This retrospective study included patients with Community Acquired Pneumonia (CAP) who received empirical therapy between January - December 2017 at Jakarta Islamic Hospital of Cempaka Putih. Two hundred and ninety four subjects were included in this study. Results: Subjects who received monotherapy and combination therapy were 73.8% and 26.2%. Mean length of stay was 5 days. The most widely used antibiotic in this study was ceftriaxone with levofloxacin (35%) for combination therapy and levofloxacin (38,2%) for monotherapy. There is a relationship between comorbidities and long-term hospitalization (p=0.008). Conclusion: There was no significant difference between combination therapy and monotherapy with length of stay (p=0.277). Keywords: Pneumonia, monotherapy, combination therapy, Jakarta Islamic Hospital of Cempaka Putih","PeriodicalId":32369,"journal":{"name":"Kartika Jurnal Ilmiah Farmasi","volume":"7 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kartika Jurnal Ilmiah Farmasi","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20885/jif.vol17.iss1.art6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Background: Pneumonia causes high mortality, hospitalization costs and health services. There is some growing debate regarding the efficacy of different treatment management approaches. The use of certain antibiotic regimens combination and monotherapy have been associated with improved outcomes. Objective: This study aims to determine the effectiveness of monotherapy and combination therapy on length of stay. Method: This retrospective study included patients with Community Acquired Pneumonia (CAP) who received empirical therapy between January - December 2017 at Jakarta Islamic Hospital of Cempaka Putih. Two hundred and ninety four subjects were included in this study. Results: Subjects who received monotherapy and combination therapy were 73.8% and 26.2%. Mean length of stay was 5 days. The most widely used antibiotic in this study was ceftriaxone with levofloxacin (35%) for combination therapy and levofloxacin (38,2%) for monotherapy. There is a relationship between comorbidities and long-term hospitalization (p=0.008). Conclusion: There was no significant difference between combination therapy and monotherapy with length of stay (p=0.277). Keywords: Pneumonia, monotherapy, combination therapy, Jakarta Islamic Hospital of Cempaka Putih
社区获得性肺炎住院患者单药与联合治疗的比较
背景:肺炎导致高死亡率、住院费用和卫生服务。关于不同治疗管理方法的有效性,有越来越多的争论。使用某些抗生素方案联合和单一治疗与改善的结果有关。目的:本研究旨在确定单药治疗和联合治疗对住院时间的影响。方法:本回顾性研究纳入2017年1月至12月在雅加达普提伊斯兰医院接受经验治疗的社区获得性肺炎(CAP)患者。本研究共纳入294名受试者。结果:接受单药治疗和联合治疗的患者分别占73.8%和26.2%。平均住院时间为5天。本研究中最广泛使用的抗生素是头孢曲松与左氧氟沙星联合治疗(35%)和左氧氟沙星单药治疗(38.2%)。合并症与长期住院之间存在相关性(p=0.008)。结论:联合治疗与单药治疗的住院时间差异无统计学意义(p=0.277)。关键词:肺炎;单药治疗;联合治疗
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
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
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