RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To provide health care professionals with an overview of interventions that may be done to reduce the incidence of urinary tract infections (UTIs) in elderly patients, especially those residing in extended care facilities. DATA SOURCES: A Medline search of the English literature was performed from 1980 to January 2006 to find literature relevant to urinary tract prophylaxis. Further references were hand-searched from relevant sources. STUDY SELECTION: When assessing the effectiveness of various clinical interventions for reducing the incidence of UTIs in the elderly, preference was given to more recent, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized studies, but studies of less robust design also were included in the discussions when the former were lacking. DATA EXTRACTION: Where possible, recent publications were favored over older studies. References were all reviewed by the authors and chosen to present key citations. DATA SYNTHESIS: Data selection was prioritized to address specific subtopics. CONCLUSION: Though still frequent in occurrence and quite costly in terms of morbidity, mortality, and cost to the health care system, numerous measures may be taken to ameliorate the incidence of UTIs in elderly, institutionalized residents. First and foremost, establishing and adhering to good infection-control practices by health care givers and minimizing the use of indwelling catheters are essential. Adequate staffing and training are germane to this effort. Reasonably well-designed clinical studies also give credence to the use of topical estrogens and lactobacillus "probiotics" for female subgroups and cranberry juice for a wider array of patients. Vitamin C is of no proven benefit. With regard to antibiotics, with the relative paucity of data available for this patient population, concerns for resistance proliferation must be balanced against perceived gains in UTI reduction.
Asunto(s)
Instituciones de Cuidados Especializados de Enfermería , Infecciones Urinarias/prevención & control , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Bacteriuria/tratamiento farmacológico , Catéteres de Permanencia/efectos adversos , Humanos , Factores de Riesgo , Infecciones Urinarias/tratamiento farmacológico , Infecciones Urinarias/etiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Use of acid suppressant medications has increased in both frequency and breadth in recent years. Data have indicated that questionable use of acid suppressants for non-accepted indications is common. OBJECTIVE: To assess the indications and prevalence of acid suppressants used by inpatients on admission and at discharge. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of 213 patients admitted to the University of Michigan Hospital non-critical care general medical service was conducted. Relevant medical history, acid suppressant drug used, and indications were collected from both inpatient medical records and discharge medication lists. RESULTS: Of the 213 patients reviewed, 29% were taking acid suppressants prior to admission, with 33% being proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). Once patients were admitted, acid suppressant use increased to 71% (152 of 213), with 84% PPIs, 11% histamine(2)-receptor antagonists, and 5% combination therapy. Based upon our criteria, only 10% (15 of 152) of those on acid suppressants were found to have an acceptable indication. In patients where any history of gastroesophageal reflux disorder (GERD) was deemed as an acceptable indication (32 other patients), 31% (47 of 152) had an acceptable indication. For the 137 patients with non-accepted indications, 29% had no discernable indication and 38% were prescribed acid suppressants for corticosteroid-associated or stress ulcer prophylaxis. A history of gastrointestinal bleeds or peptic ulcer disease of more than 3 months since initial diagnosis or documented exacerbation of symptoms comprised 8% of the population. The aforementioned group of GERD patients made up 23% of this group. Compared to the 29% of patients taking acid suppressants prior to admission, 54% (115 of 213) of patients were prescribed acid suppressants at discharge. If only recent exacerbations of GERD were deemed as long-term indications, 10% (12 of 115) of these patients were found to have accepted indications. If all GERDs were acceptable long-term indications, 27% (31 of 115) would have met criteria for acceptable outpatient use. CONCLUSIONS: There is considerable excess usage of acid suppressants in both the inpatient and outpatient settings.