Nosocomial or Healthcare Facility-Related Pneumonia in Adults

Antibiotic prescription patterns in hospitalized patients with nursing home-acquired pneumonia

BACKGROUND

Considerable research has increased our understanding of antibiotic prescribing practices in hospital settings when it comes to nosocomial pneumonia. Much less is known about the antibiotic prescribing patterns for hospitalized non-critically ill patients with nursing home-acquired pneumonia (NHAP).

OBJECTIVE

As part of a multisite quality improvement project, we sought to examine patterns of antibiotic prescription among healthcare providers as a function of underlying comorbid, functional, and clinical factors.

SETTING

Three tertiary care centers.

INTERVENTION

Chart reviews of 397 individual admissions were performed on patients admitted from nursing homes with the diagnosis of pneumonia between January 2005 and September 2007.

RESULTS

Compliance with national guidelines for the treatment of NHAP was poor. Overall, the 3 most commonly used compounds for inpatient treatment were fluoroquinolones (51.4%), ceftriaxone (45.0%), and azithromycin (42.1%). Monotherapy was prescribed in 57.1%. Fluoroquinolones represented 79.5% of these cases. Patients with higher acuity of illness were more likely to receive a combination of vancomycin plus piperacillin/tazobactam (P < 0.001). Median duration of treatment was 8.0 (range, 3-21) days. Stratified analyses showed that combination therapy was used more often on University-affiliated services than on private service (54% vs. 35%; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

There was poor adherence with antibiotic guidelines for the treatment of NHAP. In the absence of outcome data on guidelines compliance, antibiotic use was influenced by patients' age, severity of illness, and providers' academic affiliation. Future research should focus on outcome measures and physicians factors that influence nonadherence.

[Contribution of microbiological investigations to the diagnosis of lower respiratory tract infections]

The diagnosis of community-acquired pneumonia is usually based on clinical and radiological criteria. The identification of a causative organism is not required for the diagnosis. Although numerous microbiological techniques are available, their sensitivity and specificity are not high enough to guide first-line antimicrobial therapy. Consequently, this treatment remains most often empiric. If the causative organism is identified, the antimicrobial treatment is adapted. Sputum analysis may be proposed as a diagnostic tool for patients with an acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, in specific cases (prior antibiotherapy, hospitalization, failure of the empiric antimicrobial treatment).

Nosocomial pneumonia: emerging concepts in diagnosis, management, and prophylaxis

Nosocomial pneumonia is a dynamic disease with multiple etiologic agents and a changing natural history. The highest attack rates and mortality occur in patients with ventilator-associated pneumonia. Diagnosis of nosocomial pneumonia is often made by clinical criteria that are sensitive but lack specificity. The use of quantitative endotracheal aspirates or bronchoscopy with bronchoalveolar lavage and protected specimen brush clearly improve diagnostic specificity and outcome in patients who are mechanically ventilated. The rapid spread of multidrug-resistant, spp, and has made initial empiric therapy more difficult. Management principles include the use of techniques for more accurate diagnosis and early antimicrobial therapy with appropriate agents along with careful analysis of culture results, clinical response, and potential complications of pneumonia and therapy. Strategies for prophylaxis are of critical importance for risk reduction, improvement in patient outcome, and reduction of hospital costs.

Risk factors for nosocomial pneumonia. Focus on prophylaxis

Despite an increased understanding of the pathogenesis of NP and advances in diagnosis and treatment, the risk, cost, morbidity, and mortality of NP remain unacceptably high. This article has identified strategic areas for primary and secondary prophylaxis that are simple and cost-effective. Realizing that the pathogenesis of NP requires bacterial colonization and the subsequent entry of these bacteria into the lower respiratory tree helps highlight the role of cross-infection and the importance of standard infection control procedures. Similarly the role of sedation and devices as risk factors can be reduced by minimizing the duration and intensity of sedation and length of exposure to invasive devices. Additional low-cost interventions that have been shown to be effective in preventing NP are the positioning of patients in a semirecumbent position and the appropriate use of enteral feeding, antibiotics, and selected medical devices. Prophylaxis of NP and VAP is carried out best by a multidisciplinary management team comprised of physicians (critical care, pulmonary medicine, infectious diseases, and primary care), critical care and infection control nurses, and respiratory therapists, even though this approach may result in decreased professional autonomy and freedom. This group should review the current guidelines, pathways, and standards for short-term and long-term prophylaxis of NP and VAP, then integrate them into and monitor their use for routine patient care. The risk factors and prophylaxis strategies for NP discussed in this article apply primarily to patients in acute care facilities, but also are relevant to alternative health care settings as well as the care of ill patients in ambulatory settings. The routine use of effective team policies for prophylaxis needs to be monitored by the Joint Commission for the Accreditation of Health Care or other agencies. Research to delineate the most effective and feasible strategies for prophylaxis NP has been compromised by insufficient funding and lack of adequate, randomized multicenter studies to enable generalizability of results. Effective strategies for prophylaxis have not been disseminated widely or implemented in hospitals. Successful short-term and long-term strategies for prophylaxis must be evaluated and implemented by a team of physicians, nurses, and respiratory therapists. More than 100 years ago, Sir William Osler warned health care providers, "Remember how much you don't know." The authors would add that clinicians have acquired significant knowledge about risk factors and prophylaxis of NP in the 1980s and 1990s, but prophylaxis as a theory rather than an action. If the tree has not been planted, the time is now.