根据抗生素风险调整的结果排序和反应的可取性(DOOR/RADAR)事后分析支持重症监护病房获得性肺炎抗生素启动策略的等效性。

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q4 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Surgical infections Pub Date : 2024-04-01 Epub Date: 2024-03-07 DOI:10.1089/sur.2023.367
Christopher A Guidry, Lynn Chollet-Hinton, Jordan Baker, Jacob C O'Dell, Robel T Beyene, Christopher M Watson, Robert G Sawyer, Steven Q Simpson, Leanne Atchison, Michael Derickson, Lindsey C Cooper, G Patton Pennington, Sheri VandenBerg, Bachar N Halimeh
{"title":"根据抗生素风险调整的结果排序和反应的可取性(DOOR/RADAR)事后分析支持重症监护病房获得性肺炎抗生素启动策略的等效性。","authors":"Christopher A Guidry, Lynn Chollet-Hinton, Jordan Baker, Jacob C O'Dell, Robel T Beyene, Christopher M Watson, Robert G Sawyer, Steven Q Simpson, Leanne Atchison, Michael Derickson, Lindsey C Cooper, G Patton Pennington, Sheri VandenBerg, Bachar N Halimeh","doi":"10.1089/sur.2023.367","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b><i>Background:</i></b> Pneumonia is the most common intensive care unit (ICU)-acquired infection and source of potential sepsis in ICU populations but can be difficult to diagnose in real-time. Despite limited data, rapid initiation of antibiotic agents is endorsed by society guidelines. We hypothesized that a post hoc analysis of a recent randomized pilot study would show no difference between two antibiotic initiation strategies. <b><i>Patients and Methods:</i></b> The recent Trial of Antibiotic Restraint in Presumed Pneumonia (TARPP) was a pragmatic cluster-randomized pilot of antibiotic initiation strategies for patients with suspected ICU-acquired pneumonia. Participating ICUs were cluster-randomized to either an immediate initiation protocol or a specimen-initiated protocol where a gram stain was required for initiation of antibiotics. Patients in the study were divided into one of seven mutually exclusive outcome rankings (desirability of outcome ranking; DOOR): (1) Survival, No Pneumonia, No adverse events; (2) Survival, Pneumonia, No adverse events; (3) Survival, No Pneumonia, ventilator-free-alive days ≤14; (4) Survival, Pneumonia, ventilator-free-alive days ≤14; (5) Survival, No Pneumonia, Subsequent episode of suspected pneumonia; (6) Survival, Pneumonia, Subsequent episode of suspected pneumonia; and (7) Death. These rankings were further refined using the duration of antibiotics prescribed for pneumonia (response adjusted for antibiotic risk; RADAR). <b><i>Results:</i></b> There were 186 patients enrolled in the study. After applying the DOOR analysis, a randomly selected patient was equally likely to have a better outcome in specimen-initiated arm as in the immediate initiation arm (DOOR probability: 50.8%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 42.7%-58.9%). Outcome probabilities were similar after applying the RADAR analysis (52.5%; 95% CI, 44.2%-60.6%; p = 0.31). <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> We found that patients for whom antibiotic agents were withheld until there was objective evidence (specimen-initiated group) had similar outcome rankings to patients for whom antibiotic agents were started immediately. This supports the findings of the TARPP pilot trial and provides further evidence for equipoise between these two treatment strategies.</p>","PeriodicalId":22109,"journal":{"name":"Surgical infections","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Desirability of Outcome Ranking and Response Adjusted for Antibiotic Risk (DOOR/RADAR) Post Hoc Analysis Supports Equipoise for Antibiotic Initiation Strategies in Intensive Care Unit-Acquired Pneumonia.\",\"authors\":\"Christopher A Guidry, Lynn Chollet-Hinton, Jordan Baker, Jacob C O'Dell, Robel T Beyene, Christopher M Watson, Robert G Sawyer, Steven Q Simpson, Leanne Atchison, Michael Derickson, Lindsey C Cooper, G Patton Pennington, Sheri VandenBerg, Bachar N Halimeh\",\"doi\":\"10.1089/sur.2023.367\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b><i>Background:</i></b> Pneumonia is the most common intensive care unit (ICU)-acquired infection and source of potential sepsis in ICU populations but can be difficult to diagnose in real-time. Despite limited data, rapid initiation of antibiotic agents is endorsed by society guidelines. We hypothesized that a post hoc analysis of a recent randomized pilot study would show no difference between two antibiotic initiation strategies. <b><i>Patients and Methods:</i></b> The recent Trial of Antibiotic Restraint in Presumed Pneumonia (TARPP) was a pragmatic cluster-randomized pilot of antibiotic initiation strategies for patients with suspected ICU-acquired pneumonia. Participating ICUs were cluster-randomized to either an immediate initiation protocol or a specimen-initiated protocol where a gram stain was required for initiation of antibiotics. Patients in the study were divided into one of seven mutually exclusive outcome rankings (desirability of outcome ranking; DOOR): (1) Survival, No Pneumonia, No adverse events; (2) Survival, Pneumonia, No adverse events; (3) Survival, No Pneumonia, ventilator-free-alive days ≤14; (4) Survival, Pneumonia, ventilator-free-alive days ≤14; (5) Survival, No Pneumonia, Subsequent episode of suspected pneumonia; (6) Survival, Pneumonia, Subsequent episode of suspected pneumonia; and (7) Death. These rankings were further refined using the duration of antibiotics prescribed for pneumonia (response adjusted for antibiotic risk; RADAR). <b><i>Results:</i></b> There were 186 patients enrolled in the study. After applying the DOOR analysis, a randomly selected patient was equally likely to have a better outcome in specimen-initiated arm as in the immediate initiation arm (DOOR probability: 50.8%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 42.7%-58.9%). Outcome probabilities were similar after applying the RADAR analysis (52.5%; 95% CI, 44.2%-60.6%; p = 0.31). <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> We found that patients for whom antibiotic agents were withheld until there was objective evidence (specimen-initiated group) had similar outcome rankings to patients for whom antibiotic agents were started immediately. This supports the findings of the TARPP pilot trial and provides further evidence for equipoise between these two treatment strategies.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":22109,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Surgical infections\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Surgical infections\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1089/sur.2023.367\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/3/7 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"INFECTIOUS DISEASES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgical infections","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/sur.2023.367","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:肺炎是重症监护病房(ICU)最常见的获得性感染,也是 ICU 病人潜在败血症的来源,但很难实时诊断。尽管数据有限,但快速启动抗生素制剂得到了社会指南的认可。我们假设,对最近一项随机试点研究进行的事后分析表明,两种抗生素启动策略之间没有差异。患者和方法:最近开展的 "假定肺炎患者抗生素限制试验"(TARPP)是一项针对疑似重症监护病房获得性肺炎患者抗生素应用策略的集群随机试验。参与研究的重症监护病房被分组随机分配到立即启动方案或标本启动方案,其中标本启动方案需要进行革兰氏染色才能启动抗生素。研究中的患者被分为七个相互排斥的结果等级(结果等级的可取性;DOOR)之一:(1)存活,无肺炎,无不良事件;(2)存活,肺炎,无不良事件;(3)存活,无肺炎,无呼吸机存活天数≤14 天;(4)存活,肺炎,无呼吸机存活天数≤14 天;(5)存活,无肺炎,继发疑似肺炎;(6)存活,肺炎,继发疑似肺炎;(7)死亡。使用肺炎抗生素处方的持续时间(根据抗生素风险调整的反应;RADAR)对这些排名进行了进一步细化。结果共有 186 名患者参与了研究。在应用 DOOR 分析后,随机抽取的患者在标本启动组和立即启动组获得较好结果的可能性相同(DOOR 概率:50.8%;95% 置信区间 [CI],42.7%-58.9%)。应用 RADAR 分析后,结果概率相似(52.5%;95% CI,44.2%-60.6%;P = 0.31)。结论:我们发现,在有客观证据之前暂不使用抗生素的患者(标本启动组)与立即开始使用抗生素的患者结果排名相似。这支持了 TARPP 试点试验的结果,并进一步证明了这两种治疗策略之间的等效性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Desirability of Outcome Ranking and Response Adjusted for Antibiotic Risk (DOOR/RADAR) Post Hoc Analysis Supports Equipoise for Antibiotic Initiation Strategies in Intensive Care Unit-Acquired Pneumonia.

Background: Pneumonia is the most common intensive care unit (ICU)-acquired infection and source of potential sepsis in ICU populations but can be difficult to diagnose in real-time. Despite limited data, rapid initiation of antibiotic agents is endorsed by society guidelines. We hypothesized that a post hoc analysis of a recent randomized pilot study would show no difference between two antibiotic initiation strategies. Patients and Methods: The recent Trial of Antibiotic Restraint in Presumed Pneumonia (TARPP) was a pragmatic cluster-randomized pilot of antibiotic initiation strategies for patients with suspected ICU-acquired pneumonia. Participating ICUs were cluster-randomized to either an immediate initiation protocol or a specimen-initiated protocol where a gram stain was required for initiation of antibiotics. Patients in the study were divided into one of seven mutually exclusive outcome rankings (desirability of outcome ranking; DOOR): (1) Survival, No Pneumonia, No adverse events; (2) Survival, Pneumonia, No adverse events; (3) Survival, No Pneumonia, ventilator-free-alive days ≤14; (4) Survival, Pneumonia, ventilator-free-alive days ≤14; (5) Survival, No Pneumonia, Subsequent episode of suspected pneumonia; (6) Survival, Pneumonia, Subsequent episode of suspected pneumonia; and (7) Death. These rankings were further refined using the duration of antibiotics prescribed for pneumonia (response adjusted for antibiotic risk; RADAR). Results: There were 186 patients enrolled in the study. After applying the DOOR analysis, a randomly selected patient was equally likely to have a better outcome in specimen-initiated arm as in the immediate initiation arm (DOOR probability: 50.8%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 42.7%-58.9%). Outcome probabilities were similar after applying the RADAR analysis (52.5%; 95% CI, 44.2%-60.6%; p = 0.31). Conclusions: We found that patients for whom antibiotic agents were withheld until there was objective evidence (specimen-initiated group) had similar outcome rankings to patients for whom antibiotic agents were started immediately. This supports the findings of the TARPP pilot trial and provides further evidence for equipoise between these two treatment strategies.

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
Surgical infections
Surgical infections INFECTIOUS DISEASES-SURGERY
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
5.00%
发文量
127
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Surgical Infections provides comprehensive and authoritative information on the biology, prevention, and management of post-operative infections. Original articles cover the latest advancements, new therapeutic management strategies, and translational research that is being applied to improve clinical outcomes and successfully treat post-operative infections. Surgical Infections coverage includes: -Peritonitis and intra-abdominal infections- Surgical site infections- Pneumonia and other nosocomial infections- Cellular and humoral immunity- Biology of the host response- Organ dysfunction syndromes- Antibiotic use- Resistant and opportunistic pathogens- Epidemiology and prevention- The operating room environment- Diagnostic studies
×
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