Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Surveillance cultures in intensive care units: a nationwide survey on current practice providing future perspectives.
Scholte, Johannes B J; van Mook, Walther N K A; Linssen, Catharina F M; van Dessel, Helke A; Bergmans, Dennis C J J; Savelkoul, Paul H M; Roekaerts, Paul M H J.
Afiliação
  • Scholte JB; Department of Intensive Care Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht, the Netherlands. Electronic address: janscholte@hotmail.com.
  • van Mook WN; Department of Intensive Care Medicine, Maastricht UMC+, Maastricht, the Netherlands. Electronic address: w.van.Mook@MUMC.nl.
  • Linssen CF; Department of Microbiology, Atrium Medical Center, Heerlen, the Netherlands. Electronic address: k.linssen@mumc.nl.
  • van Dessel HA; Department of Microbiology, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht, the Netherlands. Electronic address: h.van.dessel@mumc.nl.
  • Bergmans DC; Department of Intensive Care Medicine, Maastricht UMC+, Maastricht, the Netherlands. Electronic address: d.bergmans@mumc.nl.
  • Savelkoul PH; Department of Microbiology, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht, the Netherlands. Electronic address: paul.savelkoul@mumc.nl.
  • Roekaerts PM; Department of Intensive Care Medicine, Maastricht UMC+, Maastricht, the Netherlands. Electronic address: p.roekaerts@mumc.nl.
J Crit Care ; 29(5): 885.e7-12, 2014 Oct.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24974050
PURPOSE: To explore the extent of surveillance culture (SC) implementation underlying motives for obtaining SC and decision making based on the results. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A questionnaire was distributed to Heads of Department (HODs) and microbiologists within all intensive care departments in the Netherlands. RESULTS: Response was provided by 75 (79%) of 95 HODs and 38 (64%) of 59 laboratories allied to an intensive care unit (ICU). Surveillance cultures were routinely obtained according to 55 (73%) of 75 HODs and 33 (87%) of 38 microbiologists. Surveillance cultures were obtained in more than 80% of higher-level ICUs and in 58% of lower-level ICUs (P < .05). Surveillance cultures were obtained twice weekly (88%) and sampled from trachea (87%), pharynx (74%), and rectum (68%). Thirty (58%) of 52 HODs obtained SC to optimize individual patient treatment. On suspicion of infection from an unknown source, microorganisms identified by SC were targeted according to 87%. One third of HODs targeted microorganisms identified by SC in the case of an infection not at the location where the SC was obtained. This was significantly more often than microbiologists in case of no infection (P = .02) or infection of unknown origin (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Surveillance culture implementation is common in Dutch ICUs to optimize individual patients' treatment. Consensus is lacking on how to deal with SC results when the focus of infection is not at the sampled site.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Infecções Bacterianas / Cuidados Críticos / Testes Diagnósticos de Rotina / Microbiologia Tipo de estudo: Prognostic_studies / Screening_studies Limite: Female / Humans País/Região como assunto: Europa Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2014 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Infecções Bacterianas / Cuidados Críticos / Testes Diagnósticos de Rotina / Microbiologia Tipo de estudo: Prognostic_studies / Screening_studies Limite: Female / Humans País/Região como assunto: Europa Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2014 Tipo de documento: Article