RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Shorter courses of antimicrobials have been shown to be non-inferior to longer, "traditional" duration of therapies, including for some severe healthcare-associated infections, with a few exceptions. However, evidence is lacking regarding shorter regimes against severe infections by multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacteria (MDR-GNB), which are often caused by distinct strains and commonly treated with second-line antimicrobials. In the duratiOn of theraPy in severe infecTIons by MultIdrug-reSistant gram-nEgative bacteria (OPTIMISE) trial, we aim to assess the non-inferiority of 7-day versus 14-day antimicrobial therapy in critically ill patients with severe infections caused by MDR-GNB. METHODS: This is a randomized, multicenter, open-label, parallel controlled trial to assess the non-inferiority of 7-day versus 14-day of adequate antimicrobial therapy for intensive care unit (ICU)-acquired severe infections by MDR-GNB. Adult patients with severe infections by MDR-GNB initiated after 48 h of ICU admission are screened for eligibility. Patients are eligible if they proved to be hemodynamically stable and without fever for at least 48 h on the 7th day of adequate antimicrobial therapy. After consenting, patients are 1:1 randomized to discontinue antimicrobial therapy on the 7th (± 1) day or to continue for a total of 14th (± 1) days. PLANNED OUTCOMES: The primary outcome is treatment failure, defined as death or relapse of infection within 28 days after randomization. Non-inferiority will be achieved if the upper edge of the two-tailed 95% confidence interval of the difference between the clinical failure rate in the 7-day and the 14-day group is not higher than 10%. CONCLUSION: The OPTIMISE trial is the first randomized controlled trial specifically designed to assess the duration of antimicrobial therapy in patients with severe infections by MDR-GNB. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05210387. Registered on 27 January 2022. Seven Versus 14 Days of Antibiotic Therapy for Multidrug-resistant Gram-negative Bacilli Infections (OPTIMISE).
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To analyze Health Promotion (HP) practices in different settings worldwide, presented in studies that employed the Foucauldian framework. DATA SOURCE: Scoping review performed on LILACS, MEDLINE, IBECS, BDENF, SciELO, CINAHL, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus databases. STUDY INCLUSION AND EXCLUSION CRITERIA: We included original articles, review articles, reflection articles, and case studies published in English, Portuguese, and Spanish, which addressed HP practices, analyzed using the Foucauldian framework. DATA SYNTHESIS: In the numerical synthesis, the characteristics of the included studies were described: number of studies, types of method, year of publication, characteristics of the study population, origin countries, and the HP practices addressed in the articles. The thematic synthesis was organized according to the nature of the HP practices presented and the Foucauldian analysis matrix used. RESULTS: The review covered 34 studies, published between 2006 and 2019, whose analysis resulted in 2 thematic synthesis: 1) HP as a biopolitical strategy in the neoliberal context; 2) HP as an expression of resistance and counter-conduct, presenting tensions, struggles, and power games. CONCLUSION: The field of HP mostly consists of governmentality practices that reinforce the neoliberal health perspective. Some practices show resistance and counter-conduct in the face of governmentality practices, which explains the power relationships in the field of HP.
