Anel Couzo, Adia Griffin, Courtney M Willis, Julio Mendez, Kevin L Epps
{"title":"耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌鼻腔聚合酶链反应方案对皮肤和软组织感染患者万古霉素疗程的影响","authors":"Anel Couzo, Adia Griffin, Courtney M Willis, Julio Mendez, Kevin L Epps","doi":"10.1177/08971900241273175","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Objective:</b> We evaluated the impact of a methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) nasal polymerase chain reaction (PCR) protocol on the vancomycin length of therapy (LOT) for skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs). <b>Design:</b> Retrospective quasi-experimental pre- and post- MRSA nasal PCR protocol implementation study. <b>Setting:</b> Tertiary-care academic medical center in Jacksonville, Florida. <b>Patients:</b> Eligible patients received empiric vancomycin for SSTIs from January 1st to September 30th 2020 (pre-implementation group) and from January 1st to September 30th 2022 (post-implementation group). <b>Intervention:</b> The electronic health system software was modified to provide a best-practice advisory (BPA) prompt to the pharmacist upon order verification of vancomycin for patients with SSTIs. <b>Methods:</b> We reviewed patient records to determine the time from vancomycin prescription to de-escalation. The secondary outcomes were incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI), number of vancomycin levels collected, and hospital length of stay (LOS). <b>Results:</b> The study included 131 patients (pre-implementation, n = 86 and post-implementation, n = 45). There was no significant difference in vancomycin length of therapy (LOT) between implementation groups: mean LOT in days and standard deviation (SD) were 2.7 (1.9) and 2.6 (1.3), respectively, p-value 0.493. Of significance, in the post-implementation group, vancomycin LOT between patients with a negative and positive MRSA PCR were 2.3 (1.1) and 3.9 (1.6), p-value 0.006. There was no difference in secondary outcomes. <b>Conclusion:</b> The utilization of the MRSA nasal PCR to guide vancomycin de-escalation did not significantly change the vancomycin LOT, however in the post-implementation group there was a significant difference in vancomycin LOT between negative and positive MRSA PCRs.</p>","PeriodicalId":16818,"journal":{"name":"Journal of pharmacy practice","volume":" ","pages":"93-98"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Impact of a Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus Nasal Polymerase Chain Reaction Protocol on Vancomycin Length of Therapy Among Patients With Skin and Soft Tissue Infections.\",\"authors\":\"Anel Couzo, Adia Griffin, Courtney M Willis, Julio Mendez, Kevin L Epps\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/08971900241273175\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Objective:</b> We evaluated the impact of a methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) nasal polymerase chain reaction (PCR) protocol on the vancomycin length of therapy (LOT) for skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs). <b>Design:</b> Retrospective quasi-experimental pre- and post- MRSA nasal PCR protocol implementation study. <b>Setting:</b> Tertiary-care academic medical center in Jacksonville, Florida. <b>Patients:</b> Eligible patients received empiric vancomycin for SSTIs from January 1st to September 30th 2020 (pre-implementation group) and from January 1st to September 30th 2022 (post-implementation group). <b>Intervention:</b> The electronic health system software was modified to provide a best-practice advisory (BPA) prompt to the pharmacist upon order verification of vancomycin for patients with SSTIs. <b>Methods:</b> We reviewed patient records to determine the time from vancomycin prescription to de-escalation. The secondary outcomes were incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI), number of vancomycin levels collected, and hospital length of stay (LOS). <b>Results:</b> The study included 131 patients (pre-implementation, n = 86 and post-implementation, n = 45). There was no significant difference in vancomycin length of therapy (LOT) between implementation groups: mean LOT in days and standard deviation (SD) were 2.7 (1.9) and 2.6 (1.3), respectively, p-value 0.493. Of significance, in the post-implementation group, vancomycin LOT between patients with a negative and positive MRSA PCR were 2.3 (1.1) and 3.9 (1.6), p-value 0.006. There was no difference in secondary outcomes. <b>Conclusion:</b> The utilization of the MRSA nasal PCR to guide vancomycin de-escalation did not significantly change the vancomycin LOT, however in the post-implementation group there was a significant difference in vancomycin LOT between negative and positive MRSA PCRs.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16818,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of pharmacy practice\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"93-98\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of pharmacy practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/08971900241273175\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/8/9 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of pharmacy practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/08971900241273175","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
The Impact of a Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus Nasal Polymerase Chain Reaction Protocol on Vancomycin Length of Therapy Among Patients With Skin and Soft Tissue Infections.
Objective: We evaluated the impact of a methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) nasal polymerase chain reaction (PCR) protocol on the vancomycin length of therapy (LOT) for skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs). Design: Retrospective quasi-experimental pre- and post- MRSA nasal PCR protocol implementation study. Setting: Tertiary-care academic medical center in Jacksonville, Florida. Patients: Eligible patients received empiric vancomycin for SSTIs from January 1st to September 30th 2020 (pre-implementation group) and from January 1st to September 30th 2022 (post-implementation group). Intervention: The electronic health system software was modified to provide a best-practice advisory (BPA) prompt to the pharmacist upon order verification of vancomycin for patients with SSTIs. Methods: We reviewed patient records to determine the time from vancomycin prescription to de-escalation. The secondary outcomes were incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI), number of vancomycin levels collected, and hospital length of stay (LOS). Results: The study included 131 patients (pre-implementation, n = 86 and post-implementation, n = 45). There was no significant difference in vancomycin length of therapy (LOT) between implementation groups: mean LOT in days and standard deviation (SD) were 2.7 (1.9) and 2.6 (1.3), respectively, p-value 0.493. Of significance, in the post-implementation group, vancomycin LOT between patients with a negative and positive MRSA PCR were 2.3 (1.1) and 3.9 (1.6), p-value 0.006. There was no difference in secondary outcomes. Conclusion: The utilization of the MRSA nasal PCR to guide vancomycin de-escalation did not significantly change the vancomycin LOT, however in the post-implementation group there was a significant difference in vancomycin LOT between negative and positive MRSA PCRs.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Pharmacy Practice offers the practicing pharmacist topical, important, and useful information to support pharmacy practice and pharmaceutical care and expand the pharmacist"s professional horizons. The journal is presented in a single-topic, scholarly review format. Guest editors are selected for expertise in the subject area, who then recruit contributors from that practice or topic area.