Evaluation of Antibiotic Duration after Surgical Debridement of Necrotizing Soft Tissue Infection.

Background: Necrotizing soft tissue infection (NSTI) is known to be a medical emergency with high morbidity and mortality. Guidelines do not specify the optimal duration of antibiotic agents after completion of surgical debridements of NSTI, which has created variable practice. It was hypothesized that patients with NSTI who receive 48 hours or less of post-operative antibiotic agents after final debridement have similar rates of subsequent intervention or infection recurrence, suggesting that a shorter duration of antibiotic agents may treat NSTI adequately after final surgical debridement. Patients and Methods: This was a retrospective study including adults with NSTI identified through International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9), International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10), and Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes admitted to one academic institution between January 1, 2010 and July 31, 2020. Demographics, surgical practices, antibiotic practices, and clinical outcomes including inpatient mortality, hospital length of stay (LOS), intensive care unit (ICU) LOS, total antibiotic days, necrotizing infection clinical composite end point (NICCE) success, and infection recurrence were compared based on the duration of antibiotic agents after final debridement. Results: Three hundred twenty-two patients with NSTI were included and baseline characteristics and clinical severity markers were well balanced between the two groups. In 71 patients (22%) who received less than 48 hours of antibiotic agents after final debridement there was no difference in recurrence (1.4% vs. 3.6%; p = 0.697), mortality (1.4% vs. 4.4%; p = 0.476), or ICU LOS (1 vs. 2 days; p = 0.300], but they did have a shorter hospital LOS (7 vs. 10 days; p = 0.011). Conclusions: Shorter duration of antibiotic therapy after final surgical debridement of NSTI may be appropriate in patients without another indication for antibiotic agents.

Development of a Coprecepting Model for a Preceptor-in-Training Program for New Practitioners.

Background: Preceptor development is a focus of pharmacy residency programs across the country. Graduation from residency into the role of preceptor can be a challenge, as it is one of many transitions junior practitioners make in their early careers. Literature in recent years has brought attention to the need to establish preceptor development programs that adequately allow newer preceptors to develop their skills in experiential education, for both pharmacy residents and students. Furthermore, many preceptor development programs as implemented are often didactic in nature, and include readings, webinars, and other passive learning regarding the art of precepting. Objective: Given the need to develop a preceptor development program in our service line that met the needs of preceptors-in-training and full preceptors, we offer a description of our preceptor development program in the intensive care unit. Methods: We focused on active development of preceptor skills for multiple layers of resident and student learners. In addition, this model incorporated instructing, modeling, coaching, and facilitating, as the relationship between full preceptor and preceptor-in-training evolved. It also offered the opportunity for real-time feedback and discussion on precepting performance. Conclusions: We describe our coprecepting model as an opportunity that succeeded for us in helping to transition our preceptors-in-training to full preceptors. It met the needs of our department, staff, and patients, and we believe it has the potential to be valuable as a tool extrapolated to the preceptor development programs of other institutions.

Insidious Harm of Medication Diluents as a Contributor to Cumulative Volume and Hyperchloremia: A Prospective, Open-Label, Sequential Period Pilot Study.

OBJECTIVES: Although the potential dangers of hyperchloremia from resuscitation fluids continue to emerge, no study to date has considered the contribution of medication diluents to cumulative volume and hyperchloremia. This study compares saline versus dextrose 5% in water as the primary medication diluent and the occurrence of hyperchloremia in critically ill patients. DESIGN: Prospective, open-label, sequential period pilot study. SETTING: Medical ICU of a large academic medical center. PATIENTS: Adult patients admitted to the medical ICU were eligible for inclusion. Patients who were admitted for less than 48 hours, less than 18 years old, pregnant, incarcerated, or who had brain injury were excluded. INTERVENTIONS: Saline as the primary medication diluent for 2 months followed by dextrose 5% in water as the primary medication diluent for 2 months. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 426 patients were included, 216 in the saline group and 210 in the dextrose 5% in water group. Medication diluents accounted for 63% of the total IV volume over the observation period. In the saline group, 17.9% developed hyperchloremia compared with 10.5% in the dextrose 5% in water group (p = 0.037), which was statistically significant in multivariable analysis (odds ratio, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.26-0.94; p = 0.031). In the saline group, 34.2% developed acute kidney injury versus 24.5% in the dextrose 5% in water group (p = 0.035); however, this was not statistically significant when adjusting for baseline covariates. No other significant differences in dysnatremias, insulin requirements, glucose control, ICU length of stay, or ICU mortality were observed. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified that medication diluents contribute substantially to the total IV volume received by critically ill patients. Saline as the primary medication diluent compared with dextrose 5% in water is associated with hyperchloremia, a possible risk factor for acute kidney injury.

Parenteral Nutrition and Infection Risk in the Intensive Care Unit: A Practical Guide for the Bedside Clinician.

The safety of parenteral nutrition (PN) administration in critically ill patients has been the subject of much controversy. Historically, PN administration has been associated with an increased risk of bacterial and fungal infections, leading to significant morbidity and mortality. Much of the data showing increased infectious complications compared with either no nutrition or enteral nutrition was derived from early studies conducted in the 1980s-2000s. Poor glucose control and hyperalimentation are confounding factors in many early studies, making it difficult to determine the true PN infection risks. While PN studies conducted during the past 10 years have failed to show the same infection rates, these risks continue to be cited as dogma. Potential reasons for such discordant results include improved glycemic control, avoidance of overfeeding, and improved sterility and central venous catheter care. Understanding the true infectious risk of PN administration in the intensive care unit is necessary to optimize patient care, as inappropriately withholding such nutrition is potentially deleterious. This review is meant to serve as a practical guide to the bedside clinician who is evaluating the risks and benefits of initiating PN in a critically ill patient. Each component of PN will be evaluated based on risk of infection, and the potential ways to mitigate risks will be discussed.