Rhinologist Use of Antibiotics With Nasal Packing for Epistaxis.

IF 2.5 3区 医学 Q1 OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY
Jonathan Ross Mallen, Davis M Aasen, Jackson Ross Vuncannon, Chia-Ling Kuo, Jinjian Mu, Belachew Tessema, Seth M Brown
{"title":"Rhinologist Use of Antibiotics With Nasal Packing for Epistaxis.","authors":"Jonathan Ross Mallen,&nbsp;Davis M Aasen,&nbsp;Jackson Ross Vuncannon,&nbsp;Chia-Ling Kuo,&nbsp;Jinjian Mu,&nbsp;Belachew Tessema,&nbsp;Seth M Brown","doi":"10.1177/19458924231176394","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There is limited evidence supporting the usage of prophylactic antibiotics in the setting of nasal packing for epistaxis. It is unclear what current antiobiotic usage patterns are by otolaryngologists.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Characterize the antibiotic prescribing practices employed by otolaryngologists in the management of epistaxis patients treated with packing as well as the underlying rationale. Explore the impact of experience, geography, and academic affiliation on treatment decisions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An anonymous survey of antibiotic prescribing patterns for patients with epistaxis requiring nasal packing was distributed to all physician members of the American Rhinologic Society. Responses to each question were descriptively summarized including 95% confidence intervals and were linked to demographics using Fisher's exact tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>One thousand one hundred and thirteen surveys were distributed with 307 responses (27.6%). Antibiotic prescription rates varied based on packing type, with 20.0% prescribing antibiotics for dissolvable packing compared to 84.2% to 84.6% for nondissolvable packing. The absorbance of nondissolvable packing does not impact the decision to prescribe antibiotics (<i>P</i> > .999). Precisely 69.7% (95% CI: 64.0%-74.8%) stop antibiotics immediately following packing removal. Precisely 85.6% (95% CI: 81.6%-89.9%) cite the risk of toxic shock syndrome (TSS) when prescribing antibiotics. Notable regional differences include greater utilization of amoxicillin-clavulanate in the Midwest (67.6%) and Northeast (61.4%) as compared with the South (42.1%) and West (45.1%) (<i>P</i> = .013). Further, years in practice were positively associated with several patterns including prescribing antibiotics for patients with dissolvable packing (<i>P</i> = .008), citing prevention of sinusitis as a rationale for antibiotic use (<i>P</i> < .001), and a higher likelihood of having treated a patient with TSS (<i>P</i> = .002).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Antibiotic use in patients with epistaxis controlled with nondissolvable packing is common. Treatment patterns are influenced by geography, years in practice, and practice type.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>4.</p>","PeriodicalId":7650,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Rhinology & Allergy","volume":"37 5","pages":"558-562"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Rhinology & Allergy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/19458924231176394","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: There is limited evidence supporting the usage of prophylactic antibiotics in the setting of nasal packing for epistaxis. It is unclear what current antiobiotic usage patterns are by otolaryngologists.

Objectives: Characterize the antibiotic prescribing practices employed by otolaryngologists in the management of epistaxis patients treated with packing as well as the underlying rationale. Explore the impact of experience, geography, and academic affiliation on treatment decisions.

Methods: An anonymous survey of antibiotic prescribing patterns for patients with epistaxis requiring nasal packing was distributed to all physician members of the American Rhinologic Society. Responses to each question were descriptively summarized including 95% confidence intervals and were linked to demographics using Fisher's exact tests.

Results: One thousand one hundred and thirteen surveys were distributed with 307 responses (27.6%). Antibiotic prescription rates varied based on packing type, with 20.0% prescribing antibiotics for dissolvable packing compared to 84.2% to 84.6% for nondissolvable packing. The absorbance of nondissolvable packing does not impact the decision to prescribe antibiotics (P > .999). Precisely 69.7% (95% CI: 64.0%-74.8%) stop antibiotics immediately following packing removal. Precisely 85.6% (95% CI: 81.6%-89.9%) cite the risk of toxic shock syndrome (TSS) when prescribing antibiotics. Notable regional differences include greater utilization of amoxicillin-clavulanate in the Midwest (67.6%) and Northeast (61.4%) as compared with the South (42.1%) and West (45.1%) (P = .013). Further, years in practice were positively associated with several patterns including prescribing antibiotics for patients with dissolvable packing (P = .008), citing prevention of sinusitis as a rationale for antibiotic use (P < .001), and a higher likelihood of having treated a patient with TSS (P = .002).

Conclusions: Antibiotic use in patients with epistaxis controlled with nondissolvable packing is common. Treatment patterns are influenced by geography, years in practice, and practice type.

Level of evidence: 4.

鼻科医生使用抗生素与鼻填充物治疗鼻出血。
背景:有有限的证据支持预防性抗生素的使用鼻腔填塞设置鼻出血。目前耳鼻喉科医生的抗生素使用模式尚不清楚。目的:描述耳鼻喉科医生在鼻出血患者的治疗中使用抗生素处方的做法,以及其基本原理。探讨经验、地理和学术关系对治疗决策的影响。方法:对需要鼻腔填塞的鼻出血患者的抗生素处方模式进行匿名调查,分发给美国鼻学会的所有医师成员。对每个问题的回答进行了描述性总结,包括95%的置信区间,并使用Fisher精确检验将其与人口统计学联系起来。结果:共发放问卷1113份,回复307份(27.6%)。抗生素处方率因包装类型而异,可溶性包装的处方率为20.0%,而非可溶性包装的处方率为84.2%至84.6%。不溶性包装的吸光度不影响开抗生素的决定(P > .999)。69.7%(95%置信区间:64.0%-74.8%)的患者在包装移除后立即停用抗生素。确切地说,85.6% (95% CI: 81.6%-89.9%)的人在开抗生素处方时提到了中毒性休克综合征(TSS)的风险。与南部(42.1%)和西部(45.1%)相比,中西部(67.6%)和东北部(61.4%)的阿莫西林-克拉维酸使用率更高(P = 0.013)。此外,实践年限与几种模式呈正相关,包括为可溶性包装患者开抗生素处方(P = 0.008),引用预防鼻窦炎作为抗生素使用的基本原理(P = 0.002)。结论:应用不溶性填充物控制鼻出血患者抗生素应用较为普遍。治疗模式受地理、实践年限和实践类型的影响。证据等级:4。
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
5.60
自引率
11.50%
发文量
82
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Rhinology & Allergy is a peer-reviewed, scientific publication committed to expanding knowledge and publishing the best clinical and basic research within the fields of Rhinology & Allergy. Its focus is to publish information which contributes to improved quality of care for patients with nasal and sinus disorders. Its primary readership consists of otolaryngologists, allergists, and plastic surgeons. Published material includes peer-reviewed original research, clinical trials, and review articles.
×
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