RESUMO
Stenotrophomonas maltophilia is a multidrug-resistant bacterium that is difficult to treat in hospitals worldwide, leading to high mortality. Published data describing the use of monotherapy or combination therapy and which one is better is still unclear. We aimed to investigate the efficacy of monotherapy and combination therapy in the treatment of S. maltophilia infections. We performed a systematic review of combination therapy and additionally a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the effects of monotherapy versus combination therapy on mortality in S. maltophilia infections. Electronic databases: Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, Scopus, and OpenGrey were accessed. Of the 5030 articles identified, 17 studies were included for a systematic review of combination therapy, of which 4 cohort studies were finally included for meta-analysis. We found there is a trend of favorable outcomes with respect to mortality in the use of combination therapy to treat complex or severe S. maltopholia infections. A meta-analysis of monotherapy showed a statistical significance in the decreasing rate of mortality in hospital-acquired pneumonia (hazard ratio 1.42; 95% confidence interval, 1.04-1.94) compared to combination therapy, but not significant in bacteremia (hazard ratio 0.76; 95% confidence interval, 0.18-3.18). Further studies should continue to explore this association.
RESUMO
Background: Mortality from multidrug-resistant (MDR) pathogens is an urgent healthcare crisis worldwide. At present we do not have any simplified screening tools to predict the risk of mortality associated with MDR infections. The aim of this study was to develop a screening tool to predict mortality in patients with multidrug-resistant organisms. Methods: A retrospective cohort study to evaluate mortality risks in patients with MDR infections was conducted at Phrae Hospital. Univariable and multivariable analyses were used to classify possible risk factors. The model performance was internally validated utilizing the mean of three measures of discrimination corrected by the optimism using a 1000-bootstrap procedure. The coefficients were transformed into item scores by dividing each coefficient with the lowest coefficient and then rounding to the most adjacent number. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AuROC) was used to determine the performance of the model. Results: Between 1 October 2018 and 30 September 2020, a total of 504 patients with MDR infections were enrolled. The ICU-SEPSA score composed of eight clinical risk factors: 1) immunocompromised host, 2) chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, 3) urinary tract infection, 4) sepsis, 5) placement of endotracheal tube, 6) pneumonia, 7) septic shock, and 8) use of antibiotics within the past 3 months. The model showed good calibration (Hosmer-Lemeshow χ2 = 19.27; p-value = 0.50) and good discrimination after optimism correction (AuROC 84.6%, 95% confidence interval [Cl]: 81.0%-88.0%). The positive likelihood ratio of low risk (score ≤ 5) and high risk (score ≥ 8) were 2.07 (95% CI: 1.74-2.46) and 12.35 (95% CI: 4.90-31.13), respectively. Conclusion: A simplified predictive scoring tool wad developed to predict mortality in patients with MDR infections. Due to a single-study design of this study, external validation of the results before applying in other clinical practice settings is warranted.
RESUMO
Few studies have analyzed community hospital-based parenteral anti-infective therapy (CohPAT). We aimed to assess the clinical impact of a pharmacist-led implementation of a clinical practice guideline (CPG) for CohPAT, and to determine the pharmacist's role in CohPAT medication management. The prospective-period patients (post-implementation group) were compared with the historical control-period patients (pre-implementation group) for receiving a continuous antimicrobial parenteral injection. A CPG was used for laboratory testing for efficacy and safety, the monitoring of adverse drug events during admission, microbiology results coordination, and dosage adjustment. For any antimicrobial drug-related problems, the pharmacist consulted with the clinicians. Over 14 months, 50 participants were included in each group. In the pre-implementation period, 7 (14%) and 4 (8%) out of 50 patients received an inappropriate dosage and nonlaboratory monitoring for dose adjustment, respectively. The patients received the proper dosage of antimicrobial agents, which increased significantly from 78% pre- to 100% post-implementation (p = 0.000). The pharmacist's interventions during the prospective-period were completely accepted by the clinicians, and significantly greater laboratory monitoring complying with CPG was given to the postimplementation group than the pre-implementation group (100% vs. 60%; p = 0.000). Significantly less patients with unfavorable outcomes (failure or in-hospital mortality) were observed in the post-implementation than in the pre-implementation (6% vs. 26%; p = 0.006) group. For the logistic regression analysis, lower respiratory infection (adjusted OR, aOR 3.68; 95%CI 1.13-12.06) and the post-implementation period (aOR 0.21; 95%CI 0.06-0.83) were significant risk factors that were associated with unfavorable outcomes. Given the better clinical outcomes and the improved quality of septic patient care observed after implementation, pharmacist-led implementation should be adopted in healthcare settings.
