Survey of infectious diseases providers reveals variability in duration of antibiotic therapy for the treatment of Gram-negative bloodstream infections.


Journal

JAC-antimicrobial resistance
ISSN: 2632-1823
Titre abrégé: JAC Antimicrob Resist
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101765283

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Mar 2022
Historique:
received: 27 12 2021
accepted: 10 01 2022
entrez: 14 2 2022
pubmed: 15 2 2022
medline: 15 2 2022
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Trials supporting shorter durations of antibiotic therapy for Gram-negative bloodstream infections (GN-BSI) have recently been published. However, adoption of these findings into practice is unclear given limited eligibility criteria and relatively large non-inferiority margins of these studies. To better understand contemporary management of GN-BSI, we conducted an international survey of infectious diseases (ID) specialists. We developed and disseminated an online survey to assess practice patterns involving treatment duration of GN-BSI, including providers from 28 countries. χ In total, 277 ID specialists completed the survey (64% physicians, 31% pharmacists). The median reported duration of antibiotics was 7 days (IQR, 7-10 days) for all GN-BSI sources. Thirty percent of providers typically recommend durations that differ by ≥7 days depending on the source of GN-BSI, and 71% treat ≥10 days for at least one source. In an adjusted model, factors associated with increased duration included intra-abdominal (+1.01 days, 95% CI 0.57-1.45 days; There is extensive heterogeneity in duration of therapy for treating GN-BSI, particularly with respect to source of GN-BSI. Investigations into appropriate treatment durations for different GN-BSI sources are needed.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Trials supporting shorter durations of antibiotic therapy for Gram-negative bloodstream infections (GN-BSI) have recently been published. However, adoption of these findings into practice is unclear given limited eligibility criteria and relatively large non-inferiority margins of these studies. To better understand contemporary management of GN-BSI, we conducted an international survey of infectious diseases (ID) specialists.
METHODS METHODS
We developed and disseminated an online survey to assess practice patterns involving treatment duration of GN-BSI, including providers from 28 countries. χ
RESULTS RESULTS
In total, 277 ID specialists completed the survey (64% physicians, 31% pharmacists). The median reported duration of antibiotics was 7 days (IQR, 7-10 days) for all GN-BSI sources. Thirty percent of providers typically recommend durations that differ by ≥7 days depending on the source of GN-BSI, and 71% treat ≥10 days for at least one source. In an adjusted model, factors associated with increased duration included intra-abdominal (+1.01 days, 95% CI 0.57-1.45 days;
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
There is extensive heterogeneity in duration of therapy for treating GN-BSI, particularly with respect to source of GN-BSI. Investigations into appropriate treatment durations for different GN-BSI sources are needed.

Identifiants

pubmed: 35156030
doi: 10.1093/jacamr/dlac005
pii: dlac005
pmc: PMC8827556
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

dlac005

Subventions

Organisme : NCATS NIH HHS
ID : KL2 TR002554
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIAID NIH HHS
ID : UM1 AI104681
Pays : United States

Informations de copyright

© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy.

Références

Biometrics. 1986 Mar;42(1):121-30
pubmed: 3719049
Pharmacotherapy. 2018 Apr;38(4):476-481
pubmed: 29493791
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2017 Feb 23;61(3):
pubmed: 27993852
Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2019 May;38(5):851-857
pubmed: 30680566
Clin Infect Dis. 2020 Dec 15;71(12):3071-3078
pubmed: 31858136
J R Soc Med. 2011 Dec;104(12):510-20
pubmed: 22179294
Clin Microbiol Infect. 2020 Jul;26(7):904-910
pubmed: 32114010
Clin Infect Dis. 2018 Jan 6;66(2):172-177
pubmed: 29190320
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2005 Feb;49(2):760-6
pubmed: 15673761
Am J Epidemiol. 2003 Feb 15;157(4):364-75
pubmed: 12578807
Clin Microbiol Infect. 2022 Apr;28(4):550-557
pubmed: 34508886
Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2018 May;51(5):794-798
pubmed: 29309899
JAMA Intern Med. 2017 Sep 1;177(9):1308-1315
pubmed: 28604925
Open Forum Infect Dis. 2019 Aug 30;7(12):ofz386
pubmed: 33335941
Clin Microbiol Infect. 2020 Jul;26(7):897-903
pubmed: 32006697
Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2021 Dec;58(6):106451
pubmed: 34653617
Infection. 2018 Jun;46(3):333-339
pubmed: 29397537
Annu Rev Public Health. 2009;30:151-74
pubmed: 19705558
Clin Infect Dis. 2019 Sep 13;69(7):1091-1098
pubmed: 30535100
JAMA. 2020 Jun 2;323(21):2160-2169
pubmed: 32484534
Trials. 2020 Jan 15;21(1):92
pubmed: 31941546
Clin Infect Dis. 2018 Jan 6;66(1):11-19
pubmed: 29020202

Auteurs

Joshua T Thaden (JT)

Division of Infectious Diseases, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA.

Pranita D Tamma (PD)

Department of Pediatrics, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.

Qing Pan (Q)

Department of Statistics, The George Washington University, Washington, DC, USA.

Yohei Doi (Y)

Center for Innovative Antimicrobial Therapy, Division of Infectious Diseases, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.

Nick Daneman (N)

Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Classifications MeSH