ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The antimicrobial de-escalation strategy (ADE) plays a crucial role in antimicrobial stewardship, reducing the likelihood of bacterial resistance. This study aims to evaluate how often the intensive care unit (ICU) used ADE for empirical treatment during COVID-19. MATERIALS: Adult ICU patients receiving empirical antimicrobial therapy for bacterial infections were retrospectively studied from September 2020 to December 2021. ADE was defined as (1) discontinuation of an antimicrobial in case of empirical combination therapy or (2) replacement of the antimicrobial to narrow the antimicrobial spectrum within the first 3 days of therapy, according to the test results and clinical picture. RESULTS: A total of 99 patients were included in the study. The number of patients who received empirical combined therapy (38.4%) was lower than those who received monotherapy (61.6%). The most preferred monotherapy (45.9%) was piperacillin-tazobactam, while the most preferred in combination treatment (22.7%) was meropenem. Within the first 3 days of admittance to the ICU, 3% of patients underwent ADE for their empirical antimicrobial therapy, 61.6% underwent no change, and 35.4% underwent change other than ADE. Procalcitonin levels were below 2 µg/L on the third day of treatment in 69.7% of the patients. Culture or culture-antibiogram results of 50.5% of the patients were obtained within the first 3 days of empirical therapy. There was no growth in the culture results of 21 patients (21.2%) during their ICU stay. CONCLUSION: In this study, ADE practice was much lower than expected. In order to reduce the significant differences between theory and reality, clinical, laboratory, and organisational conditions must be objectively assessed along with patient characteristics.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To investigate potential differences in discharge time, feeding methods and amounts, daily weight gain, vital signs, pain, and comfort levels among preterm infants born at 28-32 weeks' gestation who were hospitalized in the neonatal intensive care unit during long-term follow-up while implementing a light-dark cycle. DESIGN AND METHODS: This is a randomized controlled study conducted with the support of a day-night cycle in premature infants born at 28-32 weeks' gestation and admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit of a teaching and research hospital affiliated with the Ministry of Health. The study compared the follow-up results from hospitalization to discharge over a period of 8 weeks. RESULTS: 50% of premature infants admitted to the unit are multiple pregnancies. There was no significant difference in discharge weight, comfort level, pain level, vital signs of the infants included in the study (p > 0.05). The optimal development of infant feeding patterns was examinedand it was observed that the study group had significantly improved before the control group in terms of the time to switch to full enteral feeding and oral feeding (p < 0,05). The daily weight gain of the babies was examined, it was seen that the weight gain was higher in the study group compared to the control group (p < 0,05). The mean duration of hospitalization was compared, it was seen that the babies in the study group were discharged significantly earlier (p < 0,05). CONCLUSION: The study compared the long-term outcomes of premature babies hospitalized in neonatal intensive care and babies exposed to a light-dark cycle and regularly monitored in standard care. The results showed that the babies in the study group had higher daily weight gain and were discharged earlier than the control group. There were also no statistically significant differences in comfort and pain scores, vital signs or oxygen saturation between the study and control groups. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: A light-dark cycle was found to be a feasible and promising intervention for infants at 28-32 weeks' gestation. It was a nurse-led management of care that could be integrated into the usual care of 28-32-week-old babies in neonatal units.
