有创通气患者PICU临床医生实践和呼吸培养观念的全国调查

Anna Sick-Samuels, Danielle Koontz, Anping Xie, Daniel Kell, Charlotte Woods-Hill, Anushree Aneja, Shaoming Xiao, Elizabeth Colantuoni, Jill Marsteller, Aaron Milstone
{"title":"有创通气患者PICU临床医生实践和呼吸培养观念的全国调查","authors":"Anna Sick-Samuels, Danielle Koontz, Anping Xie, Daniel Kell, Charlotte Woods-Hill, Anushree Aneja, Shaoming Xiao, Elizabeth Colantuoni, Jill Marsteller, Aaron Milstone","doi":"10.1017/ash.2023.236","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Respiratory cultures are commonly obtained from patients with suspicion for ventilator-associated infections (VAIs). In the absence of specimen ordering and collection guidelines, management practices may differ. We characterized current respiratory culture collection practices and perceptions and identified potential barriers to changing practices among a national collaborative of pediatric intensive care units (PICUs). Methods: We conducted an electronic survey of PICU physicians, advanced practice providers (APPs), respiratory therapists (RTs), and nurses at 16 US academic pediatric hospitals across the United States. Positive Likert-scale responses (eg, “agree” and “strongly agree”) were grouped. To account for varying hospital representation, we analyzed the results as the median proportion of participants with that response across the hospitals. Results: After excluding incomplete responses, 568 (44%) of 1,301 invited participants responded (range, 16–107 per site); the median hospital response rate was 60% (range, 17%–83%). Roles included physicians (35%), APPs (10%), RTs (24%), and nurses (31%). Moreover, 44% of the participating units cared for cardiac surgery patients. Across hospitals, specimens are often collected by RTs, followed by nurses, typically via inline endotracheal aspirate for either endotracheal tubes or tracheostomies. Saline lavage is a common practice, but only 4% reported a standardized approach. Examining the likeliness to obtain cultures for different clinical symptoms, the widest variation in responses were for fever and inflammatory markers without respiratory symptoms (median proportion, 68%; IQR, 54%–79%), isolated change in secretion characteristics (67%; IQR, 54%–78%), isolated increased secretions (55%; IQR, 40%–65%), isolated inflammatory markers (49%; IQR, 38%–57%) or isolated fever (49%; IQR, 38%–61%). Overall, 75% (IQR, 70%–86%) of reported respiratory cultures were likely to be obtained as a “pan culture.” Most respondents (median proportion, 69%) felt confident about the indications to obtain cultures, but 60% felt that clinicians had a low threshold, and 84% reported clinical practice variation. Barriers to change included reluctance to change (70%), opinion of consultants (64%), and fear of missing a diagnosis of VAI (62%). Respondents agreed that they would find clinical decision support (CDS) tools helpful (79%). In addition, 83% expected that they would follow CDS, and 82% thought that CDS would help align ICU and/or consulting teams. Conclusions: Among 16 participating hospitals, we detected a lack of standardized respiratory-culture specimen collection and ordering practices. Most respondents agreed that CDS tools would be helpful. Diagnostic stewardship of respiratory cultures using CDS must account for potential reluctance to change and needs to address stakeholder perspectives, including fear of missing infections. Disclosure: None","PeriodicalId":7953,"journal":{"name":"Antimicrobial Stewardship & Healthcare Epidemiology","volume":"18 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A national survey of PICU clinician practices and perceptions about respiratory cultures for invasively ventilated patients\",\"authors\":\"Anna Sick-Samuels, Danielle Koontz, Anping Xie, Daniel Kell, Charlotte Woods-Hill, Anushree Aneja, Shaoming Xiao, Elizabeth Colantuoni, Jill Marsteller, Aaron Milstone\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/ash.2023.236\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Respiratory cultures are commonly obtained from patients with suspicion for ventilator-associated infections (VAIs). In the absence of specimen ordering and collection guidelines, management practices may differ. We characterized current respiratory culture collection practices and perceptions and identified potential barriers to changing practices among a national collaborative of pediatric intensive care units (PICUs). Methods: We conducted an electronic survey of PICU physicians, advanced practice providers (APPs), respiratory therapists (RTs), and nurses at 16 US academic pediatric hospitals across the United States. Positive Likert-scale responses (eg, “agree” and “strongly agree”) were grouped. To account for varying hospital representation, we analyzed the results as the median proportion of participants with that response across the hospitals. Results: After excluding incomplete responses, 568 (44%) of 1,301 invited participants responded (range, 16–107 per site); the median hospital response rate was 60% (range, 17%–83%). Roles included physicians (35%), APPs (10%), RTs (24%), and nurses (31%). Moreover, 44% of the participating units cared for cardiac surgery patients. Across hospitals, specimens are often collected by RTs, followed by nurses, typically via inline endotracheal aspirate for either endotracheal tubes or tracheostomies. Saline lavage is a common practice, but only 4% reported a standardized approach. Examining the likeliness to obtain cultures for different clinical symptoms, the widest variation in responses were for fever and inflammatory markers without respiratory symptoms (median proportion, 68%; IQR, 54%–79%), isolated change in secretion characteristics (67%; IQR, 54%–78%), isolated increased secretions (55%; IQR, 40%–65%), isolated inflammatory markers (49%; IQR, 38%–57%) or isolated fever (49%; IQR, 38%–61%). Overall, 75% (IQR, 70%–86%) of reported respiratory cultures were likely to be obtained as a “pan culture.” Most respondents (median proportion, 69%) felt confident about the indications to obtain cultures, but 60% felt that clinicians had a low threshold, and 84% reported clinical practice variation. Barriers to change included reluctance to change (70%), opinion of consultants (64%), and fear of missing a diagnosis of VAI (62%). Respondents agreed that they would find clinical decision support (CDS) tools helpful (79%). In addition, 83% expected that they would follow CDS, and 82% thought that CDS would help align ICU and/or consulting teams. Conclusions: Among 16 participating hospitals, we detected a lack of standardized respiratory-culture specimen collection and ordering practices. Most respondents agreed that CDS tools would be helpful. Diagnostic stewardship of respiratory cultures using CDS must account for potential reluctance to change and needs to address stakeholder perspectives, including fear of missing infections. Disclosure: None\",\"PeriodicalId\":7953,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Antimicrobial Stewardship & Healthcare Epidemiology\",\"volume\":\"18 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Antimicrobial Stewardship & Healthcare Epidemiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/ash.2023.236\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Antimicrobial Stewardship & Healthcare Epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ash.2023.236","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:呼吸道培养通常用于疑似呼吸机相关感染(VAIs)的患者。在没有标本订购和收集指南的情况下,管理实践可能会有所不同。我们描述了当前的呼吸培养收集实践和观念,并确定了在全国儿科重症监护病房(picu)合作中改变实践的潜在障碍。方法:我们对美国16家学术儿科医院的PICU医生、高级执业医师(APPs)、呼吸治疗师(RTs)和护士进行了电子调查。积极的李克特量表反应(例如,“同意”和“非常同意”)被分组。为了解释不同医院的代表性,我们分析了结果,作为在医院中有这种反应的参与者的中位数比例。结果:在排除不完全回复后,1301名受邀参与者中有568人(44%)回复(范围,每个站点16-107人);医院应答率中位数为60%(范围17%-83%)。角色包括医生(35%)、app(10%)、RTs(24%)和护士(31%)。此外,44%的参与单位照顾心脏手术患者。在所有医院,标本通常由RTs收集,随后由护士收集,通常通过气管内吸痰进行气管内插管或气管切开术。生理盐水灌洗是常见的做法,但只有4%的人报告采用了标准化的方法。在检查不同临床症状获得培养的可能性时,反应差异最大的是无呼吸道症状的发烧和炎症标志物(中位数比例为68%;IQR, 54%-79%),孤立的分泌物特征变化(67%;IQR, 54%-78%),孤立性分泌物增多(55%;IQR, 40%-65%),分离的炎症标志物(49%;IQR, 38%-57%)或孤立性发热(49%;差,38% - -61%)。总的来说,75% (IQR, 70%-86%)的呼吸道培养可能是“泛培养”。大多数应答者(中位数比例为69%)对获得培养的适应症有信心,但60%的人认为临床医生的门槛较低,84%的人报告临床实践存在差异。改变的障碍包括不愿改变(70%)、咨询师的意见(64%)和害怕错过VAI的诊断(62%)。受访者同意他们会发现临床决策支持(CDS)工具有帮助(79%)。此外,83%的人期望他们会遵循CDS, 82%的人认为CDS将有助于协调ICU和/或咨询团队。结论:在16家参与的医院中,我们发现缺乏标准化的呼吸培养标本采集和订购实践。大多数受访者同意CDS工具会有所帮助。使用CDS的呼吸道培养物的诊断管理必须考虑到潜在的不愿改变和需要考虑利益相关者的观点,包括对遗漏感染的恐惧。披露:没有
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A national survey of PICU clinician practices and perceptions about respiratory cultures for invasively ventilated patients
Background: Respiratory cultures are commonly obtained from patients with suspicion for ventilator-associated infections (VAIs). In the absence of specimen ordering and collection guidelines, management practices may differ. We characterized current respiratory culture collection practices and perceptions and identified potential barriers to changing practices among a national collaborative of pediatric intensive care units (PICUs). Methods: We conducted an electronic survey of PICU physicians, advanced practice providers (APPs), respiratory therapists (RTs), and nurses at 16 US academic pediatric hospitals across the United States. Positive Likert-scale responses (eg, “agree” and “strongly agree”) were grouped. To account for varying hospital representation, we analyzed the results as the median proportion of participants with that response across the hospitals. Results: After excluding incomplete responses, 568 (44%) of 1,301 invited participants responded (range, 16–107 per site); the median hospital response rate was 60% (range, 17%–83%). Roles included physicians (35%), APPs (10%), RTs (24%), and nurses (31%). Moreover, 44% of the participating units cared for cardiac surgery patients. Across hospitals, specimens are often collected by RTs, followed by nurses, typically via inline endotracheal aspirate for either endotracheal tubes or tracheostomies. Saline lavage is a common practice, but only 4% reported a standardized approach. Examining the likeliness to obtain cultures for different clinical symptoms, the widest variation in responses were for fever and inflammatory markers without respiratory symptoms (median proportion, 68%; IQR, 54%–79%), isolated change in secretion characteristics (67%; IQR, 54%–78%), isolated increased secretions (55%; IQR, 40%–65%), isolated inflammatory markers (49%; IQR, 38%–57%) or isolated fever (49%; IQR, 38%–61%). Overall, 75% (IQR, 70%–86%) of reported respiratory cultures were likely to be obtained as a “pan culture.” Most respondents (median proportion, 69%) felt confident about the indications to obtain cultures, but 60% felt that clinicians had a low threshold, and 84% reported clinical practice variation. Barriers to change included reluctance to change (70%), opinion of consultants (64%), and fear of missing a diagnosis of VAI (62%). Respondents agreed that they would find clinical decision support (CDS) tools helpful (79%). In addition, 83% expected that they would follow CDS, and 82% thought that CDS would help align ICU and/or consulting teams. Conclusions: Among 16 participating hospitals, we detected a lack of standardized respiratory-culture specimen collection and ordering practices. Most respondents agreed that CDS tools would be helpful. Diagnostic stewardship of respiratory cultures using CDS must account for potential reluctance to change and needs to address stakeholder perspectives, including fear of missing infections. Disclosure: None
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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