RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Previous studies were conducted in all hospitalized patients with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bacteremia to determine safety and effectiveness of guideline-recommended, weight-based dosing of vancomycin. In these studies, it was observed that severely ill patients (Pitt bacteremia score ≥4 or intensive care unit [ICU] patients) were at an increased risk of mortality and/or nephrotoxicity. Therefore, a subanalysis of the effect of guideline-recommended vancomycin dosing on in-hospital mortality and nephrotoxicity in ICU patients with MRSA bacteremia was conducted. METHODS: This multicenter, retrospective, cohort study was conducted in a subset of ICU patients from a previous MRSA bacteremia study. Patients were ≥18 years old and received ≥48 hours of empiric vancomycin from July 1, 2002, to June 30, 2008. The incidence of nephrotoxicity and in-hospital mortality was compared in patients who received guideline-recommended dosing (at least 15 mg/kg per dose) to patients who received non-guideline-recommended dosing of vancomycin. Multivariable generalized linear mixed-effects models were constructed to determine independent risk factors for in-hospital mortality and nephrotoxicity. RESULTS: Guideline-recommended dosing was received by 34% of patients (n = 137). Nephrotoxicity occurred in 35% of patients receiving guideline-recommended dosing and 39% receiving non-guideline-recommended dosing (P = 0.67). In-hospital mortality rate was 24% among patients who received guideline-recommended dosing compared with 31% for non-guideline-recommended dosing (P = 0.40). Guideline-recommended dosing was not associated with nephrotoxicity (odds ratio: 1.10; 95% confidence interval: 0.43-2.79) or in-hospital mortality (odds ratio: 0.54; 95% confidence interval: 0.22-1.36) in the multivariable analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Guideline-recommended dosing of vancomycin in ICU patients with MRSA bacteremia is not significantly associated with nephrotoxicity or in-hospital mortality. However, the 7% absolute difference for in-hospital mortality suggests that larger studies are needed.
Asunto(s)
Bacteriemia/tratamiento farmacológico , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , Staphylococcus aureus Resistente a Meticilina/efectos de los fármacos , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto/normas , Infecciones Estafilocócicas/tratamiento farmacológico , Vancomicina/uso terapéutico , Anciano , Antibacterianos/farmacología , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Bacteriemia/diagnóstico , Estudios de Cohortes , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Staphylococcus aureus Resistente a Meticilina/aislamiento & purificación , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Retrospectivos , Infecciones Estafilocócicas/diagnóstico , Vancomicina/farmacologíaRESUMEN
STUDY OBJECTIVE: International normalized ratio self-testing with online remote monitoring and management (STORM2) is an alternative to anticoagulation clinic management, but the patient's perspective of this method has not been evaluated in the United States; thus we sought to evaluate the impact of STORM2 on patient satisfaction, time, and cost. DESIGN: Prospective pre- and postintervention study. SETTING: Freestanding clinical research center. PATIENTS: Forty-three patients treated with long-term warfarin therapy and monitored initially in the anticoagulation clinic setting and then with STORM2, referred from 11 medical practices. INTERVENTION: Patients were asked to complete a survey and the Duke Anticoagulation Satisfaction Scale (DASS) before (at baseline) and after at least 3 months of STORM2 (at follow-up). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Patient satisfaction and time were assessed by survey and the DASS. Costs were measured from the patient's perspective. Overall 90% of responders preferred STORM2 to traditional clinic management. The DASS questions indicated that patients were more satisfied with their anticoagulation treatment and more likely to recommend oral anticoagulation to a friend after experiencing STORM2. In addition, patients found STORM2 to be less complicated and more convenient than traditional clinic management. For each traditional monthly visit, patients drove 20 miles and expended a total of 1.8 hours; using 55¢/mile for mileage reimbursement and $15/hour for lost wages, the cost for each visit was $38. The total cost for four STORM2 visits per month was $10, for a net savings of $28 per patient per month. A total of 76% of patients were willing to pay additional money to eliminate a monthly clinic visit. CONCLUSION: STORM2 is more convenient, less complicated, preferred by patients, and saves patients time and money compared with clinic management.
Asunto(s)
Relación Normalizada Internacional/economía , Relación Normalizada Internacional/métodos , Satisfacción del Paciente/economía , Autocuidado/economía , Autocuidado/métodos , Warfarina/economía , Anticoagulantes/efectos adversos , Anticoagulantes/economía , Anticoagulantes/uso terapéutico , Costos y Análisis de Costo , Manejo de la Enfermedad , Monitoreo de Drogas/economía , Monitoreo de Drogas/métodos , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Masculino , Estudios Prospectivos , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Factores de Tiempo , Warfarina/efectos adversos , Warfarina/uso terapéuticoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Previous studies have established a correlation between vancomycin troughs and nephrotoxicity. However, data are currently lacking regarding the effect of guideline-recommended weight-based dosing on nephrotoxicity in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia (MRSAB). METHODS: Adults who were at least 18 years of age with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia and received of empiric vancomycin therapy for at least 48 hours (01/07/2002 and 30/06/2008) were included in this multicenter, retrospective cohort study. The association between guideline-recommended, weight-based vancomycin dosing (at least 15 mg/kg/dose) and nephrotoxicity (increase in serum creatinine (SCr) by more than 0.5 mg/dl or at least a 50% increase from baseline on at least two consecutive laboratory tests) was evaluated. Potential independent associations were evaluated using a multivariable general linear mixed-effect model. RESULTS: Overall, 23% of patients developed nephrotoxicity. Thirty-four percent of the 337 patients who met study criteria received weight-based dosing. The cohort was composed of 69% males with a median age of 55 years. The most common sources of MRSAB included skin/soft tissue (32%), catheter-related bloodstream bacteremia (20%), pulmonary (18%). Eighty-six percent of patients received twice daily dosing. Similar rates of nephrotoxicity were observed regardless of the receipt of guideline-recommended dosing (22% vs. 24%, OR 0.91 [95% CI 0.53-1.56]). This finding was confirmed in the multivariable analysis (OR 1.52 [95% CI 0.75-3.08]). Independent predictors of nephrotoxicity were (OR, 95% CI) vancomycin duration of greater than 15 days (3.36, 1.79-6.34), weight over 100 kg (2.74, 1.27-5.91), Pitt bacteremia score of 4 or greater (2.73, 1.29-5.79), vancomycin trough higher than 20 mcg/ml (2.36, 1.07-5.20), and age over 52 years (2.10, 1.08-4.08). CONCLUSIONS: Over one out of five patients in this study developed nephrotoxicity while receiving vancomycin for MRSAB. The receipt of guideline-recommended, weight-based vancomycin was not an independent risk factor for the development of nephrotoxicity.
Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos/efectos adversos , Bacteriemia/tratamiento farmacológico , Enfermedades Renales/inducido químicamente , Staphylococcus aureus Resistente a Meticilina , Infecciones Estafilocócicas/tratamiento farmacológico , Vancomicina/efectos adversos , Adulto , Anciano , Antibacterianos/administración & dosificación , Peso Corporal , Femenino , Hospitales , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Vancomicina/administración & dosificaciónRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: No studies have evaluated the effect of guideline-recommended weight-based dosing on in-hospital mortality of patients with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. METHODS: This was a multicenter, retrospective, cohort study of patients with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia receiving at least 48 hours of empiric vancomycin therapy between 01/07/2002 and 30/06/2008. We compared in-hospital mortality for patients treated empirically with weight-based, guideline-recommended vancomycin doses (at least 15 mg/kg/dose) to those treated with less than 15 mg/kg/dose. We used a general linear mixed multivariable model analysis with variables identified a priori through a conceptual framework based on the literature. RESULTS: A total of 337 patients who were admitted to the three hospitals were included in the cohort. One-third of patients received vancomycin empirically at the guideline-recommended dose. Guideline-recommended dosing was not associated with in-hospital mortality in the univariable (16% vs. 13%, OR 1.26 [95%CI 0.67-2.39]) or multivariable (OR 0.71, 95%CI 0.33-1.55) analysis. Independent predictors of in-hospital mortality were ICU admission, Pitt bacteremia score of 4 or greater, age 53 years or greater, and nephrotoxicity. CONCLUSIONS: Empiric use of weight-based, guideline-recommended empiric vancomycin dosing was not associated with reduced mortality in this multicenter study.
Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos/administración & dosificación , Bacteriemia/tratamiento farmacológico , Bacteriemia/mortalidad , Staphylococcus aureus Resistente a Meticilina/aislamiento & purificación , Infecciones Estafilocócicas/tratamiento farmacológico , Infecciones Estafilocócicas/mortalidad , Vancomicina/administración & dosificación , Adulto , Anciano , Bacteriemia/microbiología , Estudios de Cohortes , Femenino , Hospitales , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Retrospectivos , Infecciones Estafilocócicas/microbiología , Análisis de Supervivencia , Resultado del Tratamiento , Pesos y MedidasRESUMEN
The annual incidence of skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs) has nearly tripled in the US since the early 1990s. Many purulent SSTIs in the community setting are caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). Incision and drainage (I&D) are indicated for most purulent MRSA infections; however, the use of adjunctive antibacterials is controversial. The objective of this study was to systematically evaluate studies that have investigated whether or not antibacterials provide added benefit to I&D alone for purulent MRSA SSTIs. We included articles from MEDLINE and The Cochrane Library that fulfilled the following criteria: (i) original research; (ii) English language; (iii) compared I&D alone versus I&D plus antibacterials for purulent MRSA SSTIs; and (iv) compared patient outcomes. We also reviewed the references of these articles to identify other relevant studies. Studies that solely examined paediatric patients were excluded. To facilitate cross-study comparison, we systematically evaluated the following study characteristics: (i) study design; (ii) patient population; (iii) comparator groups; (iv) sample size; (v) outcome measures; (vi) outcome definitions; (vii) duration of follow-up; and (viii) measurement and adjustment of potential confounding variables. Eleven studies, spanning more than 30 years, met inclusion criteria. Two of these were conducted prior to the emergence of MRSA in the community; another evaluated cephalexin versus placebo for MRSA. None of these found added benefit of adjunctive antibacterials. Four studies compared health outcomes between patients who received 'active' or 'appropriate' therapy and those who received 'inactive' or 'inappropriate' therapy after I&D for purulent MRSA SSTIs. Two of these studies found 'active' or 'appropriate' therapy to be beneficial, while two others did not. Four studies compared health outcomes between patients who received anti-MRSA antibacterials plus I&D with those who received alternative antibacterials plus I&D for purulent MRSA SSTIs. Three of these reported improved outcomes with anti-MRSA antibacterials, while another reported mixed findings. Presently, the bulk of the available evidence suggests anti-MRSA antibacterials provide added benefit to I&D alone for purulent MRSA SSTIs; however, the current evidence is limited to small, case-control, observational studies.
Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Drenaje/métodos , Staphylococcus aureus Resistente a Meticilina/efectos de los fármacos , Infecciones de los Tejidos Blandos/terapia , Infecciones Cutáneas Estafilocócicas/terapia , Adulto , Terapia Combinada , Humanos , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como AsuntoRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Quantify the prevalence, measure the severity, and describe treatment patterns in patients who present to medical clinics in Texas with community-acquired methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (CA-MRSA) skin and soft-tissue infections (SSTI). METHODS: Ten primary care clinics participated in this prospective, community-based study. Clinicians consented patients and collected clinical information, pictures, and wound swabs; data were processed centrally. MRSASelect™ was used for identification. Susceptibilities were determined via Etest®. RESULTS: Overall, 73 of 119 (61%) patients presenting with SSTIs meeting eligibility requirements had CA-MRSA. Among these, 49% were male, 79% were Hispanic, and 30% had diabetes. Half (56%) of the lesions were ≥ 5 cm in diameter. Most patients had abscesses (82%) and many reported pain scores of ≥ 7 of 10 (67%). Many presented with erythema (85%) or drainage (56%). Most received incision and drainage plus an antibiotic (64%). Antibiotic monotherapy was frequently prescribed: trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX) (78%), clindamycin (4%), doxycycline (2%), and mupirocin (2%). The rest received TMP-SMX in combination with other antibiotics. TMP-SMX was frequently administered as one double-strength tablet twice daily. Isolates were 93% susceptible to clindamycin and 100% susceptible to TMP-SMX, doxycycline, vancomycin, and linezolid. CONCLUSIONS: We report a predominance of CA-MRSA SSTIs, favorable antibiotic susceptibilities, and frequent use of TMP-SMX in primary care clinics.