病人的β-内酰胺过敏:抗生素管理的挑战。

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q3 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Julia Bodega-Azuara, Maria Dolores Belles Medall, Josep Edo-Peñarrocha, Aarón Puplá-Bartoll, Raul Ferrando Piqueres, MarÍa Cruz Torres-Górriz, Adrián Germán-Sánchez, Ernesto Enrique
{"title":"病人的β-内酰胺过敏:抗生素管理的挑战。","authors":"Julia Bodega-Azuara, Maria Dolores Belles Medall, Josep Edo-Peñarrocha, Aarón Puplá-Bartoll, Raul Ferrando Piqueres, MarÍa Cruz Torres-Górriz, Adrián Germán-Sánchez, Ernesto Enrique","doi":"10.1136/ejhpharm-2022-003304","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Patients are commonly reported as being allergic to beta-lactam (BL) antibiotics. However, many patients with this reported allergy are able to receive BL treatments because they do not have true allergies. In many cases these are simply intolerances due to side effects reported as an allergy. Delabelling these patients leads to better clinical outcomes, optimal antibiotic usage, decreased bacterial resistance and reduced healthcare costs. Therefore, the aims of this study were to identify incorrectly labelled BL allergies in hospitalised patients and to assess antibiotic use in delabelled patients in order to establish a quality indicator to optimise antimicrobial treatments.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A prospective study was conducted in which hospitalised patients treated with antimicrobial drugs and labelled as 'BL-allergic' were identified by clinical pharmacists. An allergist assessed whether patients were suitable candidates for a skin test or oral challenge. The Allergy Service removed 'BL-allergic' labels if negative results were obtained. Delabelled patients were followed up by clinical pharmacists to study the use of BL antibiotics as a result of the delabelling programme.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 176 suspected allergic patients were identified and 91 (51.7%) were tested either by a skin test or oral challenge based on the patient indicators. Seven (16.4%) patients tested were allergic to BL antibiotics, 76 (83.5%) were totally delabelled and eight (0.1%) were partially delabelled. Thirty-two (38.1%) delabelled patients required antibiotic treatment in another inpatient or outpatient setting, of whom 27 (84.3%) patients with a new infectious episode received BL treatments while five (15.7%) continued to receive antimicrobial treatments without BL.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>After the implementation of a protocol to detect incorrect BL allergy labels, 83.5% of the patients in this cohort were completely delabelled. This shows that there is a clear opportunity to optimise the use of antibiotics by delabelling 'BL-allergic' patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":12050,"journal":{"name":"European journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice","volume":" ","pages":"307-313"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11265552/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Beta-lactam allergy in patients: an antibiotic stewardship challenge.\",\"authors\":\"Julia Bodega-Azuara, Maria Dolores Belles Medall, Josep Edo-Peñarrocha, Aarón Puplá-Bartoll, Raul Ferrando Piqueres, MarÍa Cruz Torres-Górriz, Adrián Germán-Sánchez, Ernesto Enrique\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/ejhpharm-2022-003304\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Patients are commonly reported as being allergic to beta-lactam (BL) antibiotics. However, many patients with this reported allergy are able to receive BL treatments because they do not have true allergies. In many cases these are simply intolerances due to side effects reported as an allergy. Delabelling these patients leads to better clinical outcomes, optimal antibiotic usage, decreased bacterial resistance and reduced healthcare costs. Therefore, the aims of this study were to identify incorrectly labelled BL allergies in hospitalised patients and to assess antibiotic use in delabelled patients in order to establish a quality indicator to optimise antimicrobial treatments.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A prospective study was conducted in which hospitalised patients treated with antimicrobial drugs and labelled as 'BL-allergic' were identified by clinical pharmacists. An allergist assessed whether patients were suitable candidates for a skin test or oral challenge. The Allergy Service removed 'BL-allergic' labels if negative results were obtained. Delabelled patients were followed up by clinical pharmacists to study the use of BL antibiotics as a result of the delabelling programme.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 176 suspected allergic patients were identified and 91 (51.7%) were tested either by a skin test or oral challenge based on the patient indicators. Seven (16.4%) patients tested were allergic to BL antibiotics, 76 (83.5%) were totally delabelled and eight (0.1%) were partially delabelled. Thirty-two (38.1%) delabelled patients required antibiotic treatment in another inpatient or outpatient setting, of whom 27 (84.3%) patients with a new infectious episode received BL treatments while five (15.7%) continued to receive antimicrobial treatments without BL.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>After the implementation of a protocol to detect incorrect BL allergy labels, 83.5% of the patients in this cohort were completely delabelled. This shows that there is a clear opportunity to optimise the use of antibiotics by delabelling 'BL-allergic' patients.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12050,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"307-313\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11265552/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/ejhpharm-2022-003304\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/ejhpharm-2022-003304","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:据报道,患者通常会对β-内酰胺类(BL)抗生素过敏。然而,许多报告过敏的患者能够接受β-内酰胺类抗生素治疗,因为他们并非真正过敏。在许多情况下,他们只是因为副作用而不耐受,被报告为过敏。为这些患者解除过敏标签可改善临床疗效、优化抗生素使用、减少细菌耐药性并降低医疗成本。因此,本研究的目的是识别住院患者中被错误标注的 BL 过敏症,并评估被取消标注的患者的抗生素使用情况,以建立优化抗菌治疗的质量指标:我们开展了一项前瞻性研究,由临床药剂师对使用抗菌药物治疗并被贴上 "BL 过敏 "标签的住院患者进行识别。由过敏症专家评估患者是否适合接受皮肤测试或口服挑战。如果检测结果呈阴性,过敏症服务部门会取消 "BL-过敏 "标签。临床药剂师对被取消标签的患者进行了跟踪调查,以了解取消标签后BL抗生素的使用情况:共确定了 176 名疑似过敏患者,其中 91 人(51.7%)根据患者指标接受了皮试或口服测试。经检测,7 名(16.4%)患者对 BL 抗生素过敏,76 名(83.5%)患者完全脱敏,8 名(0.1%)患者部分脱敏。32名(38.1%)被除标患者需要在其他住院或门诊环境中接受抗生素治疗,其中27名(84.3%)新发感染患者接受了BL治疗,5名(15.7%)继续接受抗菌治疗,但未使用BL:结论:在实施了检测BL过敏标签错误的方案后,该队列中83.5%的患者完全取消了标签。这表明,通过为 "BL 过敏 "患者去除标签,显然有机会优化抗生素的使用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Beta-lactam allergy in patients: an antibiotic stewardship challenge.

Background: Patients are commonly reported as being allergic to beta-lactam (BL) antibiotics. However, many patients with this reported allergy are able to receive BL treatments because they do not have true allergies. In many cases these are simply intolerances due to side effects reported as an allergy. Delabelling these patients leads to better clinical outcomes, optimal antibiotic usage, decreased bacterial resistance and reduced healthcare costs. Therefore, the aims of this study were to identify incorrectly labelled BL allergies in hospitalised patients and to assess antibiotic use in delabelled patients in order to establish a quality indicator to optimise antimicrobial treatments.

Methods: A prospective study was conducted in which hospitalised patients treated with antimicrobial drugs and labelled as 'BL-allergic' were identified by clinical pharmacists. An allergist assessed whether patients were suitable candidates for a skin test or oral challenge. The Allergy Service removed 'BL-allergic' labels if negative results were obtained. Delabelled patients were followed up by clinical pharmacists to study the use of BL antibiotics as a result of the delabelling programme.

Results: A total of 176 suspected allergic patients were identified and 91 (51.7%) were tested either by a skin test or oral challenge based on the patient indicators. Seven (16.4%) patients tested were allergic to BL antibiotics, 76 (83.5%) were totally delabelled and eight (0.1%) were partially delabelled. Thirty-two (38.1%) delabelled patients required antibiotic treatment in another inpatient or outpatient setting, of whom 27 (84.3%) patients with a new infectious episode received BL treatments while five (15.7%) continued to receive antimicrobial treatments without BL.

Conclusion: After the implementation of a protocol to detect incorrect BL allergy labels, 83.5% of the patients in this cohort were completely delabelled. This shows that there is a clear opportunity to optimise the use of antibiotics by delabelling 'BL-allergic' patients.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
5.90%
发文量
104
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: European Journal of Hospital Pharmacy (EJHP) offers a high quality, peer-reviewed platform for the publication of practical and innovative research which aims to strengthen the profile and professional status of hospital pharmacists. EJHP is committed to being the leading journal on all aspects of hospital pharmacy, thereby advancing the science, practice and profession of hospital pharmacy. The journal aims to become a major source for education and inspiration to improve practice and the standard of patient care in hospitals and related institutions worldwide. EJHP is the only official journal of the European Association of Hospital Pharmacists.
×
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