Antimicrobial therapy for asymptomatic bacteriuria or candiduria in advanced cancer patients transitioning to comfort measures

Education needed to improve antimicrobial use during end-of-life care of older adults with advanced cancer: A cross-sectional survey

BACKGROUND

Antimicrobial use during end-of-life care of older adults with advanced cancer is prevalent. Factors influencing the decision to prescribe antimicrobials during end-of-life care are not well defined.

AIM

To evaluate factors influencing medicine subspecialists to prescribe intravenous and oral antimicrobials during end-of-life care of older adults with advanced cancer to guide an educational intervention.

DESIGN

18-item single-center cross-sectional survey.

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

Inpatient medicine subspecialists in 2018.

RESULTS

Of 186 subspecialists surveyed, 67 (36%) responded. Most considered withholding antimicrobials at the time of clinical deterioration during hospitalization (n = 54/67, 81%), viewed the initiation of additional intravenous antimicrobials as escalation of care (n = 44/67, 66%), and believed decision-making should involve patients or surrogates and providers (n = 64/67, 96%). Fifty-one percent (n = 30/59) of respondents who conducted advance care planning did not discuss antimicrobials. Barriers to discussing end-of-life antimicrobials included the potential to overwhelm patients or families, challenges of withdrawing antimicrobials, and insufficient training.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the initiation of additional intravenous antimicrobials was viewed as escalation of care, antimicrobials were not routinely discussed during advance care planning. Educational interventions that promote recognition of antimicrobial-associated adverse events, incorporate antimicrobial use into advance care plans, and offer communication simulation training around the role of antimicrobials during end-of-life care are warranted.

Antimicrobial use at the end of life: a scoping review

OBJECTIVE

To examine antibiotic use in patients approaching end of life, in terms of frequency of prescription, aim of treatment, beneficial and adverse effects and contribution to the development of antimicrobial resistance.

DESIGN

Scoping review DATA SOURCES: An information scientist searched Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, The Cochrane library, PubMed Clinical Queries, NHS Evidence, Epistemonikos, SIGN, NICE, Google Scholar from inception to February 2019 for any study design including, but not limited to, randomised clinical trials, prospective interventional or observational studies, retrospective studies and qualitative studies. The search of Ovid MEDLINE was updated on the 10 June 2020.

STUDY SELECTION

Studies reporting antibiotic use in patients approaching end of life in any setting and clinicians' attitudes and behaviour in relation to antibiotic prescribing in this population DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers screened studies for eligibility; two reviewers extracted data from included studies. Data were analysed to describe antibiotic prescribing patterns across different patient populations, the benefits and adverse effects (for individual patients and wider society), the rationale for decision making and clinicians behaviours and attitudes to treatment with antibiotics in this patient group.

RESULTS

Eighty-eight studies were included. Definition of the end of life is highly variable as is use of antibiotics in patients approaching end of life. Prescribing decisions are influenced by patient age, primary diagnosis, care setting and therapy goals, although patients' preferences are not always documented or adhered to. Urinary and lower respiratory tract infections are the most commonly reported indications with outcomes in terms of symptom control and survival variably reported. Small numbers of studies reported on adverse events and antimicrobial resistance. Clinicians sometimes feel uncomfortable discussing antibiotic treatment at end of life and would benefit from guidelines to direct care.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of antibiotics in patients approaching the end of life is common although there is significant variation in practice. There are a myriad of intertwined biological, ethical, social, medicolegal and clinical issues associated with the topic.

Management of candiduria in hospitalized patients: a single-center study on the implementation of IDSA guidelines and factors affecting clinical decisions

Candiduria are common findings in clinic especially in hospitalized patients, while its significance remains undetermined. Since there are few criteria to follow, physicians tended to make decisions by personal experience in many cases in clinical practice. The present study was designed to unveil the present situation of candiduria management in hospitalized patients in clinical practice. A total of 251 hospitalized candiduria patients were retrospectively enrolled in the study. Clinical data on patient demographics, basic conditions, catheter using, urinary symptoms, laboratory data, and antifungal therapies were obtained from electronic medical records. The high rate of the candiduria cases were managed inappropriately after the introduction of the Infectious Diseases Association of America (IDSA) evidence-based recommendations, both in the management of urinary catheter and antifungal agents. Overtreatment was common in asymptomatic candiduria patients. For symptomatic patients, improper drug selections were not rare. In addition, a part of candiduria patients did not receive antifungal therapies although the IDSA recommends. A statistically significant difference was only found in hospital charges of symptomatic candiduria patients managed following IDSA or not. The recurrence rate, mortality, and hospital stay length were similar in candiduria patients regardless of the clinical management. Physicians tend to start empiric antifungal therapy for candiduria patients with pneumonia, multisite of Candida colonization, higher urine Candida CFUs, and long hospital stay. Candiduria has not received special attention today, and empirical antifungal treatment is common. IDSA guidelines are important to standardize the management of candiduria in clinic; however, the significance of the guidelines needs to be further clarified in future multicenter investigations.