某三级医院全身性抗真菌药物利用评价

Sherin Mathew, Cristy Anne Kuriakose, Sandra Shaji, Binu Upendran, Lakshmi R
{"title":"某三级医院全身性抗真菌药物利用评价","authors":"Sherin Mathew, Cristy Anne Kuriakose, Sandra Shaji, Binu Upendran, Lakshmi R","doi":"10.36348/sjmps.2023.v09i09.012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: The incidence of Invasive Fungal Infection has increased, and it constitutes a serious threat to human health and life, especially in immunocompromised and critically ill patients. We aimed to evaluate the appropriateness of antifungal agents along with their risk factors and sensitivity pattern. Methods: It is a retrospective, cross-sectional study, which includes details of patients prescribed with systemic antifungal agents during a period of five years (01-06-2016 to 31-05-2021). Collected details were compared with Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) guidelines and mycological results to determine the overall appropriateness. Results: A total of 102 patients prescribed with systemic antifungals were selected for the study. The majority of the drugs were prescribed as Definitive (59.19%) and T Fluconazole (39.4%) was the most common drug given. The most common indication for antifungal prescriptions was found to be Respiratory tract infection. Appropriateness of antifungal use was assessed on indication, dosage, contraindication, and drug-drug interaction. Overall assessment of antifungal agents and treatment strategy demonstrated that antifungal treatment was appropriate in 41.6% cases, debatable in 36% cases and inappropriate in 22.4% of cases. The most common culture specimen collected was urine and Candida tropicalis (42.86%) was the frequently separated organism from it. Sepsis (21.4%) was the most common risk factor associated with invasive fungal infection. Conclusion: By implementing an effective antifungal stewardship program, we could improve the rational use of systemic antifungals and thereby prevent the future resistance and improve clinical outcome.","PeriodicalId":21367,"journal":{"name":"Saudi Journal of Medical and Pharmaceutical Sciences","volume":"43 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Drug Utilization Evaluation of Systemic Antifungals in a Tertiary Care Hospital\",\"authors\":\"Sherin Mathew, Cristy Anne Kuriakose, Sandra Shaji, Binu Upendran, Lakshmi R\",\"doi\":\"10.36348/sjmps.2023.v09i09.012\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction: The incidence of Invasive Fungal Infection has increased, and it constitutes a serious threat to human health and life, especially in immunocompromised and critically ill patients. We aimed to evaluate the appropriateness of antifungal agents along with their risk factors and sensitivity pattern. Methods: It is a retrospective, cross-sectional study, which includes details of patients prescribed with systemic antifungal agents during a period of five years (01-06-2016 to 31-05-2021). Collected details were compared with Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) guidelines and mycological results to determine the overall appropriateness. Results: A total of 102 patients prescribed with systemic antifungals were selected for the study. The majority of the drugs were prescribed as Definitive (59.19%) and T Fluconazole (39.4%) was the most common drug given. The most common indication for antifungal prescriptions was found to be Respiratory tract infection. Appropriateness of antifungal use was assessed on indication, dosage, contraindication, and drug-drug interaction. Overall assessment of antifungal agents and treatment strategy demonstrated that antifungal treatment was appropriate in 41.6% cases, debatable in 36% cases and inappropriate in 22.4% of cases. The most common culture specimen collected was urine and Candida tropicalis (42.86%) was the frequently separated organism from it. Sepsis (21.4%) was the most common risk factor associated with invasive fungal infection. Conclusion: By implementing an effective antifungal stewardship program, we could improve the rational use of systemic antifungals and thereby prevent the future resistance and improve clinical outcome.\",\"PeriodicalId\":21367,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Saudi Journal of Medical and Pharmaceutical Sciences\",\"volume\":\"43 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Saudi Journal of Medical and Pharmaceutical Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.36348/sjmps.2023.v09i09.012\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Saudi Journal of Medical and Pharmaceutical Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36348/sjmps.2023.v09i09.012","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

摘要侵袭性真菌感染的发病率不断上升,严重威胁着人类的健康和生命,特别是在免疫功能低下和危重患者中。我们的目的是评估抗真菌药物的适宜性及其危险因素和敏感性模式。方法:这是一项回顾性横断面研究,包括5年(01-06-2016至31-05-2021)期间使用全身抗真菌药物的患者的详细信息。收集的细节与美国传染病学会(IDSA)指南和真菌学结果进行比较,以确定总体适宜性。结果:共有102例患者接受了全身性抗真菌药物治疗。最常用的药物是氟康唑(39.4%),最常用的药物是决定性药物(59.19%)。抗真菌处方最常见的适应症是呼吸道感染。评估抗真菌药物使用的适应症、剂量、禁忌症和药物-药物相互作用。对抗真菌药物和治疗策略的总体评估表明,41.6%的病例抗真菌治疗合适,36%的病例不合适,22.4%的病例不合适。尿液中最常见的培养标本为热带念珠菌(42.86%)。脓毒症(21.4%)是侵袭性真菌感染最常见的危险因素。结论:通过实施有效的抗真菌药物管理方案,可以提高全身性抗真菌药物的合理使用,从而预防未来的耐药,改善临床疗效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Drug Utilization Evaluation of Systemic Antifungals in a Tertiary Care Hospital
Introduction: The incidence of Invasive Fungal Infection has increased, and it constitutes a serious threat to human health and life, especially in immunocompromised and critically ill patients. We aimed to evaluate the appropriateness of antifungal agents along with their risk factors and sensitivity pattern. Methods: It is a retrospective, cross-sectional study, which includes details of patients prescribed with systemic antifungal agents during a period of five years (01-06-2016 to 31-05-2021). Collected details were compared with Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) guidelines and mycological results to determine the overall appropriateness. Results: A total of 102 patients prescribed with systemic antifungals were selected for the study. The majority of the drugs were prescribed as Definitive (59.19%) and T Fluconazole (39.4%) was the most common drug given. The most common indication for antifungal prescriptions was found to be Respiratory tract infection. Appropriateness of antifungal use was assessed on indication, dosage, contraindication, and drug-drug interaction. Overall assessment of antifungal agents and treatment strategy demonstrated that antifungal treatment was appropriate in 41.6% cases, debatable in 36% cases and inappropriate in 22.4% of cases. The most common culture specimen collected was urine and Candida tropicalis (42.86%) was the frequently separated organism from it. Sepsis (21.4%) was the most common risk factor associated with invasive fungal infection. Conclusion: By implementing an effective antifungal stewardship program, we could improve the rational use of systemic antifungals and thereby prevent the future resistance and improve clinical outcome.
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信