Infectious diseases now · 2025
Appropriateness of piperacillin-tazobactam prescriptions: a prospective multicentre study.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Roger Pierre-Marie, Lechiche Catherine, Quint Pauline, Simand Agnès, Roghi Jacques, Comparot Sylvie, Hennet Marc-Antoine, Beranger Catherine, Mignonat Pierre, Belmondo Laure, Denes Eric
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Our aim was to determine the reasons for appropriate Piperacillin-tazobactam (Pip-Taz) prescriptions.
METHOD: This was a prospective multicentre study of two-month Pip-Taz prescription in France. Reading of patient charts allowed for classification of diagnoses as definitive, suspected or unknown. Appropriateness of Pip-Taz was defined according to eight indications: post-operative infection in digestive surgery or urology, fever in onco-hematological patients, healthcare-associated infections (HCAI) in intensive care units, polymicrobial HCAI, infection due to multidrug-resistant bacteria, avoidance of carbapenem use, pulmonary infection in patients with chronic pulmonary disease, and following an internal guideline. Antibiotic reassessment was defined by any modification of Pip-Taz. Risk factors for erroneous Pip-Taz prescription were identified through a multivariate analysis, and participating physicians were interrogated on the subject.
RESULTS: From April to July 2024, 259 prescriptions from 14 institutions were included. The diagnosis of infection was definitive in 127 cases (49 %), suspected in 97 (37 %), and unknown in 37 (14 %). Prescriptions were deemed appropriate in 204 cases (79 %). In logistic regression, appropriate Pip-Taz prescription was associated with definitive diagnoses, HCAI, microbiological investigations, advice by infectious disease specialists, and antibiotic reassessment (all adjusted OR ≥ 2.19). All in all, 37/55 prescriptions outside the scope of guidelines were elucidated by the prescribers, the main reason for them being "out of habit" (13/37), and we found a relationship between "unknown diagnosis" and no explanation for Pip-Taz prescription (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: Pip-Taz appropriateness was associated with correct management, i.e. written diagnosis, microbiological investigation, and reassessment, while prescriptions outside guidelines were related to physician habits, including no written diagnosis.
METHOD: This was a prospective multicentre study of two-month Pip-Taz prescription in France. Reading of patient charts allowed for classification of diagnoses as definitive, suspected or unknown. Appropriateness of Pip-Taz was defined according to eight indications: post-operative infection in digestive surgery or urology, fever in onco-hematological patients, healthcare-associated infections (HCAI) in intensive care units, polymicrobial HCAI, infection due to multidrug-resistant bacteria, avoidance of carbapenem use, pulmonary infection in patients with chronic pulmonary disease, and following an internal guideline. Antibiotic reassessment was defined by any modification of Pip-Taz. Risk factors for erroneous Pip-Taz prescription were identified through a multivariate analysis, and participating physicians were interrogated on the subject.
RESULTS: From April to July 2024, 259 prescriptions from 14 institutions were included. The diagnosis of infection was definitive in 127 cases (49 %), suspected in 97 (37 %), and unknown in 37 (14 %). Prescriptions were deemed appropriate in 204 cases (79 %). In logistic regression, appropriate Pip-Taz prescription was associated with definitive diagnoses, HCAI, microbiological investigations, advice by infectious disease specialists, and antibiotic reassessment (all adjusted OR ≥ 2.19). All in all, 37/55 prescriptions outside the scope of guidelines were elucidated by the prescribers, the main reason for them being "out of habit" (13/37), and we found a relationship between "unknown diagnosis" and no explanation for Pip-Taz prescription (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: Pip-Taz appropriateness was associated with correct management, i.e. written diagnosis, microbiological investigation, and reassessment, while prescriptions outside guidelines were related to physician habits, including no written diagnosis.