ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Despite the low rate of bacterial coinfection, antibiotics are very commonly prescribed in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. RESEARCH QUESTION: Does the use of a procalcitonin (PCT)-guided antibiotic protocol safely reduce the use of antibiotics in patients with a COVID-19 infection? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: In this multicenter cohort, three groups of patients with COVID-19 were compared in terms of antibiotic consumption, namely one group treated based on a PCT-algorithm in one hospital (n = 216) and two control groups, consisting of patients from the same hospital (n = 57) and of patients from three similar hospitals (n = 486) without PCT measurements during the same period. The primary end point was antibiotic prescription in the first week of admission. RESULTS: Antibiotic prescription during the first 7 days was 26.8% in the PCT group, 43.9% in the non-PCT group in the same hospital, and 44.7% in the non-PCT group in other hospitals. Patients in the PCT group had lower odds of receiving antibiotics in the first 7 days of admission (OR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.16-0.66 compared with the same hospital; OR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.28-0.62 compared with the other hospitals). The proportion of patients receiving antibiotic prescription during the total admission was 35.2%, 43.9%, and 54.5%, respectively. The PCT group had lower odds of receiving antibiotics during the total admission only when compared with the other hospitals (OR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.08-0.63). There were no significant differences in other secondary end points, except for readmission in the PCT group vs the other hospitals group. INTERPRETATION: PCT-guided antibiotic prescription reduces antibiotic prescription rates in hospitalized patients with COVID-19, without major safety concerns.
Subject(s)
Anti-Bacterial Agents , Bacterial Infections , COVID-19 , Coinfection , Procalcitonin , Procalcitonin/blood , Drug Prescriptions/statistics & numerical data , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/complications , Humans , Cohort Studies , Coinfection/drug therapy , Bacterial Infections/complications , Bacterial Infections/drug therapy , Male , Female , Middle Aged , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Clinical ProtocolsABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: High flow nasal cannula (HFNC) reduces the need for intubation in patients with hypoxaemic acute respiratory failure (ARF), but its added value in patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and a do-not-intubate (DNI) order is unknown. We aimed to assess (variables associated with) survival in these patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We described a multicentre retrospective observational cohort study in five hospitals in the Netherlands and assessed the survival in COVID-19 patients with severe acute respiratory failure and a DNI order who were treated with high flow nasal cannula. We also studied variables associated with survival. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: One-third of patients survived after 30 days. Survival was 43.9% in the subgroup of patients with a good WHO performance status and only 16.1% in patients with a poor WHO performance status. Patients who were admitted to the hospital for a longer period prior to HFNC initiation were less likely to survive. HFNC resulted in an increase in ROX values, reflective of improved oxygenation and/or decreased respiratory rate. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that a trial of HFNC could be considered to increase chances of survival in patients with ARF due to COVID-19 pneumonitis and a DNI order, especially in those with a good WHO performance status.
