RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Infections of skin and soft tissue (SSTI) commonly cause visits to hospital emergency departments (EDs). The Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) has published guidelines for the management of SSTI, but it is unclear how closely these guidelines are followed in practice. METHODS: We reviewed records of patients seen in the ED at a large tertiary care hospital to determine guidelines adherence in 4 important areas: the decision to hospitalize, choice of antibiotics, incision and drainage (I&D) of abscesses, and submission of specimens for culture. RESULTS: The decision to hospitalize did not comply with guidelines in 19.6% of cases. Nonrecommended antibiotics were begun in the ED in 71% of patients with nonpurulent infections and 68.4% of patients with purulent infections. Abscesses of mild severity were almost always treated with antibiotics, and I&D was often not done (both against recommendations). Blood cultures were done (against recommendations) in 29% of patients with mild-severity cellulitis. Abscess drainage was almost always sent for culture (recommendations neither favor nor oppose). Overall, treatment fully complied with guidelines in 20.1% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show a striking lack of concordance with IDSA guidelines in the ED management of SSTI. Social factors may account for discordant decisions regarding site of care. Use of trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole (TMP/SMX) in cellulitis was the most common source of discordance; this practice is supported by some medical literature. Excess antibiotics were often used in cellulitis and after I&D of simple abscesses, opposing antibiotic stewardship. Ongoing education of ED doctors and continued review of published guidelines are needed.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Determining the cause of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) remains problematic. In this observational study, we systematically applied currently approved diagnostic techniques in patients hospitalized for CAP in order to determine the proportion in which an etiological agent could be identified. METHODS: All patients admitted with findings consistent with CAP were included. Sputum and blood cultures, urine tests for pneumococcal and Legionella antigens, nasopharyngeal swab for viral PCR, and serum procalcitonin were obtained in nearly every case. Admission-related electronic medical records were reviewed in entirety. RESULTS: By final clinical diagnosis, 44 patients (17.0%) were uninfected. A causative bacterium was identified in only 60 (23.2%) cases. PCR identified a respiratory virus in 42 (16.2%), 12 with documented bacterial coinfection. In 119 (45.9%), no cause for CAP was found; 69 (26.6%) of these had a syndrome indistinguishable from bacterial pneumonia. Procalcitonin was elevated in patients with bacterial infection and low in uninfected patients or those with viral infection, but with substantial overlap. CONCLUSIONS: Only 23.2% of 259 patients admitted with a CAP syndrome had documented bacterial infection; another 26.6% had no identified bacterial etiology, but findings closely resembled those of bacterial infection. Nevertheless, all 259 received antibacterial therapy. Careful attention to the clinical picture may identify uninfected patients or those with viral infection, perhaps with reassurance by a non-elevated procalcitonin. Determining an etiologic diagnosis remains elusive. Better discriminators of bacterial infection are sorely needed.
