Search

The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of inappropriate treatment among hospitalised patients affected by SARS-CoV-2 infection before hospital admission during the Omicron era. This single-centre, retrospective observational study included all the patients hospitalised because of SARS-CoV-2 infection during three periods characterised by the Italian prevalence of an Omicron variant of concern: (1) January–May 2022 (BA.1–BA.2), (2) June–October 2022 (BA.5), and (3) November 2022–March 2023 (BQ.1-XBB). Inappropriate treatment was defined as pre-hospitalisation exposure to antibiotics and/or steroids in the absence of a documented bacterial infection or the need for steroid treatment of an underlying medical condition. A total of 931 subjects were hospitalised: 394 in period 1, 334 in period 2, and 203 in period 3. Of the 157 patients undergoing inappropriate treatment (16.9%), 142 (15.3%) received antibiotics and 52 (5.6%) steroids. The proportion of inappropriately treated patients significantly decreased over time, from 23.1% in period 1 to 11.7% in period 2 and 13.3% in period 3 (p < 0.001), and there was a parallel decrease in antibiotic (p < 0.001) and steroid treatment (p < 0.013). Only 13 subjects (1.4%) received early pre-hospitalisation treatment for SARS-CoV-2. A significant proportion of hospitalised COVID-19 patients were exposed to inappropriate treatment before hospital admission. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

PurposeIntensive care interventions that prolong life without achieving meaningful benefit are considered clinically "inappropriate". In 2012, the frequency of perceived-inappropriate critical care was 10.8% at one academic health system; and we aimed to re-evaluate this frequency.MethodsFor 4 months in 2017, we surveyed critical care physicians daily and asked whether each patient was receiving appropriate, probably inappropriate, or inappropriate critical care. Patients were categorized into three groups: 1) patients for whom treatment was never inappropriate, 2) patients with at least one assessment that treatment was probably inappropriate, but no inappropriate treatment assessments, and 3) patients who had at least one assessment of inappropriate treatment.ResultsFifty-five physicians made 10,105 assessments on 1424 patients. Of these, 94 (6.6%) patients received at least one assessment of inappropriate critical care, which is lower than 2012 (10.8% (p  0.05). Inpatient mortality in 2017 was 73% for patients receiving inappropriate critical care.ConclusionsOver five years the proportion of patients perceived to be receiving inappropriate critical care dropped by 40%. Understanding the reasons for such change might elucidate how to continue to reduce inappropriate critical care.

Abstract Background Unfounded concerns regarding fever are increasingly observed among nurses worldwide. However, no study has so far explored the preferred approach towards pediatric fever among nursing students. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the attitude towards pediatric fever among final-year nursing students. Methods Between February and June 2022, final-year nursing students of 5 Italian university hospitals were asked to answer an online survey on their approach to fever in children. Both quantitative and qualitative methods were utilized. Multiple regression models were employed to explore the existence of moderators on fever conceptions. Results The survey was filled in by 121 nursing students (response rate 50%). Although most students (98%) do not consider discomfort to treat fever in children, only a minority would administer a second dose of the same antipyretic in nonresponsive cases (5.8%) or would alternate antipyretic drugs (13%). Most students would use physical methods to decrease fever (84%) and do not think that fever has mainly beneficial effects in children (72%). The own know-how adequacy on fever was inversely associated (OR 0.33, 95% CI 0.13–0.81) with the beliefs that high fever might lead to brain damage. No further predictive variable was significantly associated with the concern that fever might be associated with brain damage, the advice of physical methods use, and the assumption that fever has mostly positive effects. Discussion This study shows for the first time that misconceptions and inappropriate attitudes towards fever in children are common among final-year nursing students. Nursing students could potentially be ideal candidates for improving fever management within clinical practice and amongst caregivers.

Abstract Background Non-beneficial treatment is closely tied to inappropriate treatment at the end-of-life. Understanding the interplay between how and why these situations arise in acute care settings according to the various stakeholders is pivotal to informing decision-making and best practice at end-of-life. Aim To define and understand determinants of non-beneficial and inappropriate treatments for patients with a non-cancer diagnosis, in acute care settings at the end-of-life. Design Systematic review of peer-reviewed studies focusing on the above and conducted in upper-middle- and high-income countries. A narrative synthesis was undertaken, guided by Realist principles. Data sources Cochrane; PubMed; Scopus; Embase; CINAHL; and Web of Science. Results Sixty-six studies (32 qualitative, 28 quantitative, and 6 mixed-methods) were included after screening 4,754 papers. Non-beneficial treatment was largely defined as when the burden of treatment outweighs any benefit to the patient. Inappropriate treatment at the end-of-life was similar to this, but additionally accounted for patient and family preferences. Contexts in which outcomes related to non-beneficial treatment and/or inappropriate treatment occurred were described as veiled by uncertainty, driven by organizational culture, and limited by profiles and characteristics of involved stakeholders. Mechanisms relating to ‘Motivation to Address Conflict & Seek Agreement’ helped to lessen uncertainty around decision-making. Establishing agreement was reliant on ‘Valuing Clear Communication and Sharing of Information’. Reaching consensus was dependent on ‘Choices around Timing & Documenting of end-of-life Decisions’. Conclusion A framework mapping determinants of non-beneficial and inappropriate end-of-life treatment is developed and proposed to be potentially transferable to diverse contexts. Future studies should test and update the framework as an implementation tool. Trial registration PROSPERO Protocol CRD42021214137 .

Background: The determination of what makes a medical treatment inappropriate is unclear with a small likelihood of consensus. Objectives: This study aimed to explore how clinicians in cardiology perceive "inappropriate treatment" and to collate the common profiles of cardiology patients receiving likely "inappropriate treatment" as perceived by clinicians in a multiethnic Asian context. Methods: A qualitative study was conducted using semistructured in-depth interviews with 32 clinicians involved in the care for cardiology patients at a large national cardiology center in Singapore. Results: Clinicians' accounts indicated that elements of potentially inappropriate treatment encompass patient-related treatment elements as well as quantitative and probability-based elements such as resource use and probability of treatment benefit. Patient prognostic profiles, characterized as likely to have received inappropriate treatment by clinicians, were organized into six categories according to demographic, clinical, and functional factors. Conclusions: The perception of inappropriateness of treatments among clinicians in cardiology was primarily focused on patient-related outcomes. Collated patient profiles may serve as meaningful indicators of patient cases receiving potentially inappropriate treatment for further research and intervention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Unfounded concerns regarding fever are increasingly observed among nurses worldwide. However, no study has so far explored the preferred approach towards pediatric fever among nursing students. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the attitude towards pediatric fever among final-year nursing students. Methods: Between February and June 2022, final-year nursing students of 5 Italian university hospitals were asked to answer an online survey on their approach to fever in children. Both quantitative and qualitative methods were utilized. Multiple regression models were employed to explore the existence of moderators on fever conceptions. Results: The survey was filled in by 121 nursing students (response rate 50%). Although most students (98%) do not consider discomfort to treat fever in children, only a minority would administer a second dose of the same antipyretic in nonresponsive cases (5.8%) or would alternate antipyretic drugs (13%). Most students would use physical methods to decrease fever (84%) and do not think that fever has mainly beneficial effects in children (72%). The own know-how adequacy on fever was inversely associated (OR 0.33, 95% CI 0.13–0.81) with the beliefs that high fever might lead to brain damage. No further predictive variable was significantly associated with the concern that fever might be associated with brain damage, the advice of physical methods use, and the assumption that fever has mostly positive effects. Discussion: This study shows for the first time that misconceptions and inappropriate attitudes towards fever in children are common among final-year nursing students. Nursing students could potentially be ideal candidates for improving fever management within clinical practice and amongst caregivers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We investigated the role of infectious disease consultation (IDC) on therapeutic appropriateness in Gram-negative bloodstream infections (GNBSIs) in a setting with a high proportion of antibiotic resistance. Secondary outcomes were in-hospital mortality and the impact of rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs). Retrospective study on hospitalised patients with GNBSIs. Therapy was deemed appropriate if it had the narrowest spectrum considering infection and patients' characteristics. Interventional-IDC (I-IDC) group included patients with IDC-advised first appropriate or last non-appropriate therapy. Time to first appropriate therapy and survival were evaluated by Kaplan-Meier curves. Factors associated with therapy appropriateness were assessed by multivariate Cox proportional-hazard models. 471 patients were included. High antibiotic resistance rates were detected: quinolones 45.5%, third-generation cephalosporins 37.4%, carbapenems 7.9%. I-IDC was performed in 31.6% of patients (149/471), RDTs in 70.7% (333/471). The 7-day probability of appropriate treatment was 91.9% (95% confidence interval [95%CI]: 86.4–95.8%) vs. 75.8% (95%CI: 70.9–80.4%) with and without I-IDC, respectively (p-value = 0.0495); 85.5% (95%CI: 81.3–89.1%) vs. 69.4% (95%CI: 61.3–77.2%) with and without RDTs, respectively (p-value = 0.0023). Compared to RDTs alone, the combination with I-IDC was associated with a higher proportion of appropriate therapies at day 7: 81.9% (95%CI: 76.4–86.7%) vs. 92.6% (95%CI: 86.3–96.7%). At multivariate analysis, I-IDC and RDTs were associated with time to first appropriate therapy [adjusted hazard-ratio 1.292 (95%CI: 1.014–1.647) and 1.383 (95%CI: 1.080–1.771), respectively], with no impact on mortality. In a setting with a high proportion of antibiotic resistance, IDC and RDTs were associated with earlier prescription of appropriate therapy in GNBSIs, without impact on mortality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

INTRODUCTION: Provision of unnecessary medical services is one of the problems that have driven up health care budgets. The crowding of emergency departments (ED) and sometimes patients 'unreasonable expectations, may lead to ED staff burnout and increase the provision of unnecessary services. METHODS: In this study, the Hospital Urgencies Appropriateness Protocol (HUAP) was used to assess the appropriateness of services provided in the ED. The sample size of this study consisted of 445 patients who were selected among the patients admitted in Rasoul Akram and Firouzgar hospitals in Iran by stratified sampling. Chi-square and logistic regression tests were used to analyze the data. RESULTS: The rate of inappropriate admissions in the ED of the studied hospitals was measured at about 13%. Patients admitted to the Firouzgar ED showed a higher probability of inappropriate admission. Among the considered factors, gender and the interval between the onset of symptoms and ED admission are factors affecting inappropriate admission. CONCLUSION: The rate of inappropriate admission is seen as high in this study. Gender and the interval between the onset of symptoms and an ED admission can be considered as predictors of the provision of unnecessary services. Outcomes from this study are that it is significant to provide operational and evidence-based solutions regarding the issues related to the provision of identified unnecessary services in the ED. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Non-beneficial treatment is closely tied to inappropriate treatment at the end-of-life. Understanding the interplay between how and why these situations arise in acute care settings according to the various stakeholders is pivotal to informing decision-making and best practice at end-of-life. Aim: To define and understand determinants of non-beneficial and inappropriate treatments for patients with a non-cancer diagnosis, in acute care settings at the end-of-life. Design: Systematic review of peer-reviewed studies focusing on the above and conducted in upper-middle- and high-income countries. A narrative synthesis was undertaken, guided by Realist principles. Data sources: Cochrane; PubMed; Scopus; Embase; CINAHL; and Web of Science. Results: Sixty-six studies (32 qualitative, 28 quantitative, and 6 mixed-methods) were included after screening 4,754 papers. Non-beneficial treatment was largely defined as when the burden of treatment outweighs any benefit to the patient. Inappropriate treatment at the end-of-life was similar to this, but additionally accounted for patient and family preferences. Contexts in which outcomes related to non-beneficial treatment and/or inappropriate treatment occurred were described as veiled by uncertainty, driven by organizational culture, and limited by profiles and characteristics of involved stakeholders. Mechanisms relating to 'Motivation to Address Conflict & Seek Agreement' helped to lessen uncertainty around decision-making. Establishing agreement was reliant on 'Valuing Clear Communication and Sharing of Information'. Reaching consensus was dependent on 'Choices around Timing & Documenting of end-of-life Decisions'. Conclusion: A framework mapping determinants of non-beneficial and inappropriate end-of-life treatment is developed and proposed to be potentially transferable to diverse contexts. Future studies should test and update the framework as an implementation tool. Trial registration: PROSPERO Protocol CRD42021214137. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Health care professionals have to judge the appropriateness of treatment in critical care on a daily basis. There is general consensus that critical care interventions should not be performed when they are inappropriate. It is not yet clear which chances of survival are considered necessary or which risk for serious disabilities is acceptable in quantitative terms for different stakeholders to start intensive care treatment. Methods We performed an anonymous online survey in a random sample of 1,052 participants recruited via email invitation and social media. Age, sex, nationality, education, professional involvement in health care, critical care medicine and treatment decisions in critical care medicine as well as personal experience with critical illness were assessed as potential influencing variables. Participants provided their opinion on the necessary chances of survival and the acceptable risk for serious disabilities to start a high-risk or uncomfortable therapy for themselves, relatives or for their patients on a scale of 0–100%. Results Answers ranged from 0 to 100% for all questions. A three-peak pattern with different distributions of the peaks was observed. Sex, education, being a health care professional, being involved in treatment decisions and religiosity influence these opinions. Male respondents and those with a university education would agree that a risky and uncomfortable treatment should be started even with a low chance of survival for themselves, relatives and patients. More respondents would choose a lower necessary chance of survival (0–33% survival) when deciding for patients compared to themselves or relatives to start a risky and uncomfortable treatment. On the other hand, the majority of respondents would accept only a low risk of severe disability for both themselves and their patients. Conclusion No cut-off can be identified for the necessary chances of survival or the acceptable risk of disability to help quantify the “inappropriateness” of critical care treatment. Sex and education are the strongest influencing factors on this opinion. The large variation in personal opinions, depending on demographic and personality variables and education needs to be considered in the communication between health care professionals and patients or surrogates.

Few institutions have published reviews concerning the case consultation history of their ethics committees, and policies used by ethics committees to address inappropriate treatment are infrequently reviewed. We sought to characterize the operation of our institution's ethics committee as a representative example of a volunteer ethics committee, and outline its use of a policy to address inappropriate treatment, the Conscientious Practice Policy (CPP). Patients were identified for retrospective review from the ethics consultation database. Patient demographics, medical admission information, and consultation information were obtained from the medical record. Consultation notes were analyzed with directed content analysis. The use of the CPP was documented in each case. Groups of interest were compared via two-sample t-tests. There were 178 consultations between 2013 and 2018. The majority originated from medicine services (N = 145, 82.4%). The most common consultation reasons were end-of-life balances of acute and palliative care (N = 85, 47.2%), best interest standard (N = 82, 46.1%), medical futility (N = 68, 38.2%), and code status and intubation status (N = 67, 37.6%). Average age was 65.5 years and average hospitalization before consultation was 51.4 days. 92 patients (53.3%) had a code status change that occurred after consultation. A policy to address inappropriate treatment (CPP) was used in 42 (23.9%) of the consultations. Bivariate analysis demonstrated a reduction in policy use over time, with use in 32.1% of consultations from 2013 to 2016 and 11.4% of consultations 2017-2018, p = 0.002. End-of-life issues were the most common reason for consultation. Our consultation volume was lower than previously-published reports. A policy used to address inappropriate treatment was frequently used, although use decreased over time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rationale and Objective: Older adults in the Emergency Department (ED) often present with nonspecific complaints (NSC) that might be associated with adverse health outcomes due to underestimating the seriousness of the illness by health care workers., Methods: We selected a random sample of patients aged 65 or older who complained of weakness and were hospitalised in internal medicine departments in 2019-2021. We divided the patients into those with and without specific reasons for hospitalisation after the ED evaluation. Outcome variables included changes in medical care based on CT head scans and blood tests, and whether a delay in diagnosis led to a longer stay, in-hospital mortality, or readmission within 30 days., Results: Patients were aged 82 ± 8 years and 43.6% (233/536)were female. 46.8% (260/556) of the patients had a specific reason for hospitalisation after the ED evaluation including four patients presenting with confusion, without neurological findings but with acute ischaemia found on the brain CT. Patients without a specific presentation had fewer blood tests done due to a significantly shorter hospital stay (median (1st-3rd quartiles: 3 (2-4) vs. 4 (3-6) days, p < 0.001), a lower mortality rate, 0.3% (n = 1) compared to 4.2% (n = 11), p = 0.002), and fewer readmissions 13.5%(n = 40) compared to 20.4% (n = 53). The deaths and readmissions in both groups were not due to a delay in diagnosis., Conclusions: Elderly patients with a chief complaint of weakness with and without a specific reason for hospitalisation were not at an increased risk for inappropriate treatment or a missed diagnosis., (© 2024 The Author(s). Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Aims: Differentiating Charcot neuropathic osteoarthropathy (CN) from infection is challenging. The diagnosis of CN is often missed or delayed, resulting in inappropriate and delayed treatment. We hypothesized that the misdiagnosis of CN results in inappropriate antibiotic prescriptions and explore the sequelae of unnecessary antibiotic use.Methods: A retrospective review of patient electronic medical records from January 2010 to December 2017 was conducted for those diagnosed with CN after being referred to an orthopaedic foot and ankle specialist.Results: Our review showed 58 of 103 (56%) patients received antibiotics on the date, or within the next 7 days, of referral to foot and ankle orthopaedic specialist. The antibiotic of choice given on referral were as follows: Sulfamethoxazole/Trimethoprim 18 of 58 (31%), doxycycline 13 of 58 (22%), clindamycin 13 of 58 (22%), cephalexin 9 of 58 (16%), minocycline 5 of 58 (9%).Conclusion: Missed diagnoses for CN are common and result in complications stemming from inappropriate treatment, delays in appropriate therapy, and may accelerate antibiotic resistance. Misdiagnosis of CN contributes to the inappropriate use of prescription antibiotics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Health care professionals have to judge the appropriateness of treatment in critical care on a daily basis. There is general consensus that critical care interventions should not be performed when they are inappropriate. It is not yet clear which chances of survival are considered necessary or which risk for serious disabilities is acceptable in quantitative terms for different stakeholders to start intensive care treatment.Methods: We performed an anonymous online survey in a random sample of 1,052 participants recruited via email invitation and social media. Age, sex, nationality, education, professional involvement in health care, critical care medicine and treatment decisions in critical care medicine as well as personal experience with critical illness were assessed as potential influencing variables. Participants provided their opinion on the necessary chances of survival and the acceptable risk for serious disabilities to start a high-risk or uncomfortable therapy for themselves, relatives or for their patients on a scale of 0-100%.Results: Answers ranged from 0 to 100% for all questions. A three-peak pattern with different distributions of the peaks was observed. Sex, education, being a health care professional, being involved in treatment decisions and religiosity influence these opinions. Male respondents and those with a university education would agree that a risky and uncomfortable treatment should be started even with a low chance of survival for themselves, relatives and patients. More respondents would choose a lower necessary chance of survival (0-33% survival) when deciding for patients compared to themselves or relatives to start a risky and uncomfortable treatment. On the other hand, the majority of respondents would accept only a low risk of severe disability for both themselves and their patients.Conclusion: No cut-off can be identified for the necessary chances of survival or the acceptable risk of disability to help quantify the "inappropriateness" of critical care treatment. Sex and education are the strongest influencing factors on this opinion. The large variation in personal opinions, depending on demographic and personality variables and education needs to be considered in the communication between health care professionals and patients or surrogates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background We aimed to describe the current rates of inappropriate empirical antibiotic treatment (IEAT) in oncohematological patients with febrile neutropenia (FN) and its impact on mortality. Methods This was a multicenter prospective study of all episodes of bloodstream infection (BSI) in high-risk FN patients (2006–2017). Episodes receiving IEAT were compared with episodes receiving appropriate empirical therapy. Adherence to Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) recommendations was evaluated. Multivariate analysis was performed to identify independent risk factors for mortality in Pseudomonas aeruginosa episodes. Results Of 1615 episodes, including Escherichia coli (24%), coagulase-negative staphylococci (21%), and P. aeruginosa (16%), 394 (24%) received IEAT despite IDSA recommendations being followed in 87% of cases. Patients with multidrug-resistant gram-negative bacilli (MDR-GNB), accounting for 221 (14%) of all isolates, were more likely to receive IEAT (39% vs 7%, P <.001). Overall mortality was higher in patients with GNB BSI who received IEAT (36% vs 24%, P =.004); when considering individual microorganisms, only patients with infection caused by P. aeruginosa experienced a significant increase in mortality when receiving IEAT (48% vs 31%, P =.027). Independent risk factors for mortality in PA BSI (odds ratio [95% confidence interval] were IEAT (2.41 [1.19–4.91]), shock at onset (4.62 [2.49–8.56]), and pneumonia (3.01 [1.55–5.83]). Conclusions IEAT is frequent in high-risk patients with FN and BSI, despite high adherence to guidelines. This inappropriate treatment primarily impacts patients with P. aeruginosa –related BSI mortality and in turn is the only modifiable factor to improve outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As medical decisions fall under more scrutiny and society demands increasing transparency of care, it is likely that more opportunities for conflicts will emerge. Similarly, with increasing demand and a static supply, the issue of who receives treatment and for how long naturally will arise. This mismatch leads to discussions of resource utilization and limitation of care in light of patients' values and rights. Clinicians should always be forthcoming with the uncertainty of prognostication while also articulating the severity of a patient's disease in relation to the risk and benefits of an intervention. However, dispute over treatment course and the idea of futile care can arise for in a variety of reasons, both from the clinician and the patient. Without identifying the cause of these conflicts, it is impossible to have effective communication. At times, it is important to utilize various negotiating skills when resolving these disagreements. Regardless of the approach, practitioners need more training in and exposure to these types of conflicts. In this review, we provide a framework for the origins and current state of futility, challenges in the application of the term, and recommendations on how to approach conflict in these situations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Hereditary angioedema (HAE) is a rare, potentially life-threatening disease characterized by recurrent angioedema attacks. Abdominal symptoms of HAE typically mimic numerous abdominal emergencies, which may result in a delay of correct diagnosis and inappropriate treatments. Objective: We aimed to evaluate the difficulties experienced by patients with HAE in Turkish emergency departments (ED). Methods: We conducted face-to-face interviews with patients with HAE by using a questionnaire regarding the clinical and demographic data of the patients and difficulties encountered during ED admissions. Results: The mean (standard deviation) age of 34 patients with HAE (25 women, 9 men) was 36.2 ± 11.5 years and the mean (standard deviation) delay in diagnosis was 17.2 ± 9.7 years. Inappropriate treatment for HAE attacks was administered to 88.2% (n = 30) of patients in the ED, despite their diagnosis of HAE. The most frequent difficulty was 'not knowing how to administer C1 inhibitor concentrate' (n = 11 [32.4%]). Other difficulties encountered were as follows: ED staff being unaware of HAE (n = 6 [17.6%]), lack of C1 inhibitor concentrate in the ED (n = 3 [8.8%]), and kept waiting for the appropriate treatment in triage despite their having angioedema in the head-and-neck region (n = 2 [5.9%]). Conclusion: Patients with HAE encounter difficulties in the ED, and the delay in diagnosis could be due to a low level of awareness regarding HAE. Therefore, the management of HAE in EDs requires improvement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aims of this study were to compare the characteristics of adult patients with left-sided infective endocarditis (LSIE) diagnosed and treated in a tertiary-care hospital with those of patients referred from a second-level community hospital, and to establish the accuracy of diagnosis and adequacy of treatment in referred patients and the influence of this factor on outcome. A prospective observational cohort study was conducted at Hospital Universitari Vall d'Hebron, a 1000-bed teaching hospital in Barcelona (Spain) and a referral centre for cardiac surgery. One hundred and fourteen of 337 (34%) episodes of LSIE treated in our hospital occurred in transferred patients. As compared with patients diagnosed in our hospital, transferred patients acquired LSIE within the healthcare system less often (16.7% vs. 38.1%, p <0.001), were in better health (Charlson index 3 (interquartile range (IQR)) 1-4) vs. 4 (IQR 2-6), p <0.001), had more complications (94.7% vs. 78.9%, p <0.001), underwent more operations (69.3% vs. 22.1%, p <0.001), and experienced similar mortality (22.8% vs. 31.4%, p 0.100). Only 52 of 114 (45.6%) referred patients received an antimicrobial regimen included in the American, European or Spanish guidelines at the hospital of origin. After adjustment for congestive heart failure and staphylococcal infection in multivariate logistic regression, inadequate or no antimicrobial treatment at origin was a risk factor for in-hospital mortality (OR 3.3, 95% CI 1.1-10.0, p 0.030). Errors in the initial antimicrobial treatment prescribed for LSIE are associated with greater mortality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background : Over recent years, there have been increasing concerns regarding an increase in the number of futile and inappropriate admissions to pediatric intensive care units (PICUs) in the United Kingdom (UK). Methods : A prospective cross-sectional survey was carried out using a data collection form distributed by mail to the directors of all PICUs in the UK. Respondents were asked to give details of all patients on their unit on a specific day including age, reason for admission and any preexisting medical conditions. An assessment was made by respondents of whether the care being provided in each case was, in their opinion, appropriate, futile or inappropriate according to standard definitions. Results : We received responses from 21 units (68%) who reported the details of 111 patients. Care was felt to be appropriate in 88 of these cases (79%), futile in nine cases (8%) and inappropriate in 14 cases (13%). Futile cases were most commonly admitted with respiratory failure and all had preexisting medical conditions, most commonly developmental delay. Where care was felt to be inappropriate, respiratory failure was again the most common reason for admission and all had a preexisting medical condition, most commonly cardiovascular disease. Conclusions : The care being provided in 21% of the PICU cases, described in this study, was felt to be either futile or inappropriate by the directors of those units. There is an urgent need to, accurately, establish the resource consumption associated with these patients and to establish a standard approach to futility and inappropriate care in PICU in the UK. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Intensive care interventions that prolong life without achieving meaningful benefit are considered clinically "inappropriate". In 2012, the frequency of perceived-inappropriate critical care was 10.8% at one academic health system; and we aimed to re-evaluate this frequency., Methods: For 4 months in 2017, we surveyed critical care physicians daily and asked whether each patient was receiving appropriate, probably inappropriate, or inappropriate critical care. Patients were categorized into three groups: 1) patients for whom treatment was never inappropriate, 2) patients with at least one assessment that treatment was probably inappropriate, but no inappropriate treatment assessments, and 3) patients who had at least one assessment of inappropriate treatment., Results: Fifty-five physicians made 10,105 assessments on 1424 patients. Of these, 94 (6.6%) patients received at least one assessment of inappropriate critical care, which is lower than 2012 (10.8% (p < 0.01)). Comparing 2017 and 2012, patient age, MS-DRG, length of stay, and hospital mortality were not significantly different (p > 0.05). Inpatient mortality in 2017 was 73% for patients receiving inappropriate critical care., Conclusions: Over five years the proportion of patients perceived to be receiving inappropriate critical care dropped by 40%. Understanding the reasons for such change might elucidate how to continue to reduce inappropriate critical care., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest None, (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: The main objective of the study was to determine the frequency of patients receiving inappropriate empiric antibiotic therapy and to assess the impact in terms of increase length of hospital stay, 30-day re-admissions, and 30-day mortality., Methods: An observational retrospective cohort study was conducted over a one-month period that included all patients hospitalised from an Emergency Department (ED) due to infection. Demographic variables, comorbidity, multi-resistance risk factors, site of infection, microbiological findings, and antibiotic prescribed in ED were collected. Outcomes were length of hospital stay, 30-day re-admissions, and 30-day mortality., Results: A total of 376 patients were included, with a mean age of 71.1 (SD 21) years. The most frequent causes were respiratory (45.7%) and urine (23.9%) infections. The number of patients with length of stay over the median (≥9 days) was 165 (46.1%), with re-admissions 74 (19.7%), and mortality at 30 days 44 (11.7%). There was inappropriate antibiotic treatment in 42 (11.2%) cases. After adjusting for demographic data, comorbidity, risk factors for multidrug resistant organism, presence of sepsis criteria in ED, and site of infection, inappropriate treatment was associated with an extended length of hospital stay (OR 2.22; 95% CI; 1.07-4.60; P=.032), but did not to an increase in mortality (P=.271) or re-admission (P=.784) at 30 days., Conclusion: The inappropriate empirical antibiotic therapy in patients admitted from the ED leads to an extended hospital stay, but did not increase mortality or readmission., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier España, S.L.U. and Sociedad Española de Enfermedades Infecciosas y Microbiología Clínica. All rights reserved.)