针对疑似败血症患者不必要的快速抗生素用药制定电子临床监控措施。

IF 8.2 1区 医学 Q1 IMMUNOLOGY
Stephanie Parks Taylor, Jessica A Palakshappa, Shih-Hsiung Chou, Kevin Gibbs, Jessie King, Nikhil Patel, Marc Kowalkowski
{"title":"针对疑似败血症患者不必要的快速抗生素用药制定电子临床监控措施。","authors":"Stephanie Parks Taylor, Jessica A Palakshappa, Shih-Hsiung Chou, Kevin Gibbs, Jessie King, Nikhil Patel, Marc Kowalkowski","doi":"10.1093/cid/ciae445","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Substantial efforts focus on monitoring and reducing delays in antibiotic treatment for sepsis, but little has been done to characterize the balancing measure of sepsis overtreatment. We aimed to establish preliminary validity and usefulness of electronic health record (EHR) data-derived criteria for sepsis overtreatment surveillance (SEP-OS).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We evaluated adults with potential sepsis (≥2 Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome criteria within 6 hours of arrival) presenting to the emergency department of 12 hospitals, excluding patients with shock. We defined SEP-OS as the proportion of patients receiving rapid IV antibiotics (≤3 hours) who did not ultimately meet the Centers for Disease Control Adult Sepsis Event \"true sepsis\" definition. We evaluated the frequency and characteristics of patients meeting overtreatment criteria and outcomes associated with sepsis overtreatment.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 113 764 eligible patients, the prevalence of sepsis overtreatment was 22.5%. The measure met prespecified criteria for reliability, content, construct, and criterion validity. Patients classified by the SEP-OS overtreatment criteria had higher median antibiotic days (4 days [IQR, 2-5] vs 1 day [1-2]; P < .01), longer median length of stay (4 days [2-6] vs 3 days [2-5]; P < .01), higher hospital mortality (2.4% vs 2.1%; P = .01), and higher frequency of Clostridioides difficile infection within 6 months of hospital discharge (P < .01) compared with \"true negative\" cases.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We developed a novel, valid EHR metric for clinical surveillance of sepsis overtreatment. Applying this metric to a large cohort of potential sepsis patients revealed a high rate of overtreatment and provides a useful tool to inform sepsis quality-improvement targets.</p>","PeriodicalId":10463,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Infectious Diseases","volume":" ","pages":"14-23"},"PeriodicalIF":8.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Development of an Electronic Clinical Surveillance Measure for Unnecessary Rapid Antibiotic Administration in Suspected Sepsis.\",\"authors\":\"Stephanie Parks Taylor, Jessica A Palakshappa, Shih-Hsiung Chou, Kevin Gibbs, Jessie King, Nikhil Patel, Marc Kowalkowski\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/cid/ciae445\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Substantial efforts focus on monitoring and reducing delays in antibiotic treatment for sepsis, but little has been done to characterize the balancing measure of sepsis overtreatment. We aimed to establish preliminary validity and usefulness of electronic health record (EHR) data-derived criteria for sepsis overtreatment surveillance (SEP-OS).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We evaluated adults with potential sepsis (≥2 Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome criteria within 6 hours of arrival) presenting to the emergency department of 12 hospitals, excluding patients with shock. We defined SEP-OS as the proportion of patients receiving rapid IV antibiotics (≤3 hours) who did not ultimately meet the Centers for Disease Control Adult Sepsis Event \\\"true sepsis\\\" definition. We evaluated the frequency and characteristics of patients meeting overtreatment criteria and outcomes associated with sepsis overtreatment.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 113 764 eligible patients, the prevalence of sepsis overtreatment was 22.5%. The measure met prespecified criteria for reliability, content, construct, and criterion validity. Patients classified by the SEP-OS overtreatment criteria had higher median antibiotic days (4 days [IQR, 2-5] vs 1 day [1-2]; P < .01), longer median length of stay (4 days [2-6] vs 3 days [2-5]; P < .01), higher hospital mortality (2.4% vs 2.1%; P = .01), and higher frequency of Clostridioides difficile infection within 6 months of hospital discharge (P < .01) compared with \\\"true negative\\\" cases.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We developed a novel, valid EHR metric for clinical surveillance of sepsis overtreatment. Applying this metric to a large cohort of potential sepsis patients revealed a high rate of overtreatment and provides a useful tool to inform sepsis quality-improvement targets.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10463,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Infectious Diseases\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"14-23\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":8.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Infectious Diseases\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciae445\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"IMMUNOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Infectious Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciae445","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"IMMUNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:大量工作集中在监测和减少脓毒症抗生素治疗的延误上,但很少有人对脓毒症过度治疗的平衡衡量标准进行描述。我们旨在初步确定电子健康记录(EHR)数据衍生的脓毒症过度治疗监测(SEP-OS)标准的有效性和实用性:我们对 12 家医院急诊科就诊的潜在败血症成人患者(抵达 6 小时内≥2 个系统炎症反应综合征标准)进行了评估,不包括休克患者。我们将 SEP-OS 定义为接受快速静脉注射抗生素(≤3 小时)但最终不符合美国疾病控制中心成人脓毒症事件 "真正脓毒症 "定义的患者比例。我们评估了符合过度治疗标准的患者的频率和特征,以及与脓毒症过度治疗相关的结果:在 113 764 名符合条件的患者中,脓毒症过度治疗的发生率为 22.5%。该测量方法在可靠性、内容、结构和标准有效性方面均符合预设标准。根据 SEP-OS 过度治疗标准分类的患者与 "真实阴性 "病例相比,抗生素使用天数中位数更高(4 天 [IQR, 2-5] vs 1 天 [1-2];P < .01),住院时间中位数更长(4 天 [2-6] vs 3 天 [2-5];P < .01),住院死亡率更高(2.4% vs 2.1%;P = .01),出院后 6 个月内感染艰难梭菌的频率更高(P < .01):我们开发了一种新颖、有效的电子病历指标,用于临床监测败血症的过度治疗。将这一指标应用于一大批潜在的败血症患者,发现过度治疗的比例很高,为败血症质量改进目标提供了有用的工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Development of an Electronic Clinical Surveillance Measure for Unnecessary Rapid Antibiotic Administration in Suspected Sepsis.

Background: Substantial efforts focus on monitoring and reducing delays in antibiotic treatment for sepsis, but little has been done to characterize the balancing measure of sepsis overtreatment. We aimed to establish preliminary validity and usefulness of electronic health record (EHR) data-derived criteria for sepsis overtreatment surveillance (SEP-OS).

Methods: We evaluated adults with potential sepsis (≥2 Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome criteria within 6 hours of arrival) presenting to the emergency department of 12 hospitals, excluding patients with shock. We defined SEP-OS as the proportion of patients receiving rapid IV antibiotics (≤3 hours) who did not ultimately meet the Centers for Disease Control Adult Sepsis Event "true sepsis" definition. We evaluated the frequency and characteristics of patients meeting overtreatment criteria and outcomes associated with sepsis overtreatment.

Results: Of 113 764 eligible patients, the prevalence of sepsis overtreatment was 22.5%. The measure met prespecified criteria for reliability, content, construct, and criterion validity. Patients classified by the SEP-OS overtreatment criteria had higher median antibiotic days (4 days [IQR, 2-5] vs 1 day [1-2]; P < .01), longer median length of stay (4 days [2-6] vs 3 days [2-5]; P < .01), higher hospital mortality (2.4% vs 2.1%; P = .01), and higher frequency of Clostridioides difficile infection within 6 months of hospital discharge (P < .01) compared with "true negative" cases.

Conclusions: We developed a novel, valid EHR metric for clinical surveillance of sepsis overtreatment. Applying this metric to a large cohort of potential sepsis patients revealed a high rate of overtreatment and provides a useful tool to inform sepsis quality-improvement targets.

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
Clinical Infectious Diseases
Clinical Infectious Diseases 医学-传染病学
CiteScore
25.00
自引率
2.50%
发文量
900
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Clinical Infectious Diseases (CID) is dedicated to publishing original research, reviews, guidelines, and perspectives with the potential to reshape clinical practice, providing clinicians with valuable insights for patient care. CID comprehensively addresses the clinical presentation, diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of a wide spectrum of infectious diseases. The journal places a high priority on the assessment of current and innovative treatments, microbiology, immunology, and policies, ensuring relevance to patient care in its commitment to advancing the field of infectious diseases.
×
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