ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Pneumonia and respiratory failure are common problems in the intensive care unit (ICU) setting, often occurring together. The relative prevalence of pneumonia types (community acquired, hospital acquired, ventilator associated) and causative pathogens is not well described in patients with respiratory failure. METHODS: This was a prospective observational cohort study conducted in the medical ICU (34 beds) of Barnes-Jewish Hospital, an academic referral center of 1,300 beds from January 2016-December 2016. All patients who were prospectively adjudicated to have respiratory failure and pneumonia (RFP) regardless of pneumonia type were classified into one of four microbiologic categories: pathogen negative, antibiotic-susceptible pathogen (according to ceftriaxone susceptibility), antibiotic-resistant pathogen, and viruses. The primary outcomes assessed were the hospital mortality rate and inappropriate initial antibiotic therapy (IIAT) for non-viral pathogens. RESULTS: Among 364 consecutive patients with RFP, 63 (17.3%) had organisms that were antibiotic susceptible, 104 (28.6%) had antibiotic-resistant organisms, 118 (32.4%) were pathogen negative, and 79 (21.7%) had viral infections. For these categories, IIAT occurred in 3.2%, 21.2%, 0.8%, and 0, respectively (p < 0.001). Vasopressor-requiring shock was present in 61.9%, 72.1%, 68.6%, and 67.1%, respectively (p = 0.585), and the hospital mortality rates were 27.0%, 48.1%, 31.4%, and 36.7%, respectively (p = 0.020). Multivariable logistic regression analysis identified IIAT as an independent predictor of in-hospital death (adjusted odds ratio 5.28; 95% confidence interval 2.72-10.22; p = 0.012). Male gender, increasing Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II scores, greater age, and the presence of shock also predicted death. CONCLUSIONS: Microbiologic categorization of patients with RFP suggests that antibiotic-resistant pathogens and viruses are associated with the highest mortality rates. Vasopressor-requiring shock was common regardless of the microbiologic categorization of RFP. Future development and use of rapid diagnostics and novel therapeutics targeting specific RFP pathogens may allow more timely administration of appropriate antimicrobial therapy and enhance antibiotic stewardship practices.
Subject(s)
Pneumonia , Respiratory Insufficiency , Adult , Aged , Anti-Bacterial Agents/pharmacology , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Bacteria/drug effects , Bacteria/isolation & purification , Cross Infection/complications , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Cross Infection/microbiology , Cross Infection/mortality , Drug Resistance, Bacterial , Female , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Male , Middle Aged , Pneumonia/complications , Pneumonia/epidemiology , Pneumonia/microbiology , Pneumonia/mortality , Pneumonia, Ventilator-Associated/complications , Pneumonia, Ventilator-Associated/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Ventilator-Associated/microbiology , Pneumonia, Ventilator-Associated/mortality , Prospective Studies , Respiratory Insufficiency/complications , Respiratory Insufficiency/epidemiology , Respiratory Insufficiency/microbiology , Respiratory Insufficiency/mortality , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Antibiotics are commonly administered to hospitalized patients with infiltrates for possible bacterial pneumonia, often leading to unnecessary treatment and increasing the risk for resistance emergence. Therefore, we performed a study to determine if an enhanced antibiotic de-escalation practice could improve antibiotic utilization in mechanically ventilated patients with suspected pneumonia cared for in an academic closed intensive care unit (ICU). METHODS: This was a prospective cross-over trial comparing routine antibiotic management (RAM) and enhanced antimicrobial de-escalation (EAD) performed within two medical ICUs (total 34 beds) at Barnes-Jewish Hospital, an academic referral center. Patients in the EAD group had their antibiotic orders and microbiology results reviewed daily by a dedicated team comprised of a second-year critical care fellow, an ICU attending physician and an ICU pharmacist. Antibiotic de-escalation recommendations were made when appropriate based on microbiologic test results and clinical response to therapy. RESULTS: There were 283 patients evaluable, with suspected pneumonia requiring mechanical ventilation: 139 (49.1%) patients in the RAM group and 144 (50.9%) in the EAD group. Early treatment failure based on clinical deterioration occurred in 33 (23.7%) and 40 (27.8%) patients, respectively (P = 0.438). In the remaining patients, antimicrobial de-escalation occurred in 70 (66.0%) and 70 (67.3%), respectively (P = 0.845). There was no difference between groups in total antibiotic days ((median (interquartile range)) 7.0 days (4.0, 9.0) versus 7.0 days (4.0, 8.8) (P = 0.616)); hospital mortality (25.2% versus 35.4% (P = 0.061)); or hospital duration (12.0 days (6.0, 20.0) versus 11.0 days (6.0, 22.0) (P = 0.918). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of an EAD program to a high-intensity daytime staffing model already practicing a high-level of antibiotic stewardship in an academic ICU was not associated with greater antibiotic de-escalation or a reduction in the overall duration of antibiotic therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02685930 . Registered on 26 January 2016.
