Search

Objective: We aimed to estimate antibiotic use during the last 6 months of life for hospitalized patients under hospice or palliative care and identify potential targets (i.e. time points) for antibiotic stewardship during the end-of-life period., Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of nationwide Veterans Affairs (VA) patients who died between January 1, 2014 and December 31, 2019 and who had been hospitalized within 6 months prior to death. Data from the VA's integrated electronic medical record were collected, including demographics, comorbid conditions, and duration of inpatient antibiotics administered, along with outpatient antibiotics dispensed. A propensity score-matched cohort analysis was conducted to compare antibiotic use between hospitalized patients placed into palliative care or hospice matched to hospitalized patients not receiving palliative care or hospice., Results: There were 9808 and 40 796 propensity score-matched patient pairs in the hospice and palliative care groups, respectively. Within 14 days of placement or consultation, 41% (4040/9808) of hospice patients and 48% (19 735/40 796) of palliative care patients received at least one antibiotic, while 25% (2420/9808) matched nonhospice and 27% (10 991/40 796) matched nonpalliative care patients received antibiotics. Entry into hospice was independently associated with a 12% absolute increase in antibiotic prescribing, and entry into palliative care was associated with a 17% absolute increase during the 14 days post-entry vs. pre-entry period., Discussion: We observed that patients receiving end-of-life care had high levels of antibiotic exposure across this VA population, particularly during admissions when they received hospice or palliative care consultation., (Copyright © 2022 European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases. All rights reserved.)

Background: Use of isolation precautions (IP) may represent a trade-off between reduced transmission of infectious pathogens and reduced patient satisfaction with their care., Objective: To perform a systematic literature review and meta-analysis to identify if and how IPs impact patients' care experiences., Data Sources: Medline, ClinicalTrials.gov, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Embase, PsychInfo, HSRProj and Cochrane Library databases., Study Eligibility Criteria: Interventional and observational studies published January 1990 to May 2019 were eligible for inclusion., Participants: Patients admitted to an acute-care facility., Interventions: IPs versus no IPs., Methods: Six reviewers screened titles, abstracts and full text. Experience of care reported by patients using the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) survey was assessed as the outcome for the meta-analysis. Pooled odds ratios were calculated using the random-effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I 2 value., Results: After screening 7073 titles and abstracts, 15 independent studies were included in the review. Pooling of unadjusted estimates from the HCAHPS survey demonstrated that IP patients were less likely to give top scores on questions pertaining to respect, communication, receiving assistance and cleanliness compared to the no-IP patients. Patients under IP with longer length of stay appeared to have more negative experiences with the care received during their stay compared to no IP., Conclusions: Patients under IP were more likely to be dissatisfied with several aspects of patient care compared to patients not under IP. It is crucial to educate patients and healthcare workers in order to balance successful implementation of IP and patient care experiences, particularly in healthcare settings where it may be beneficial., (Copyright © 2020 European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases. All rights reserved.)

Background: Chemotherapy for breast cancer may have a negative impact on reproductive function due to gonadotoxicity. Fertility preservation via banking of oocytes or embryos after ovarian stimulation with FSH can increase the likelihood of a future live birth. It has been hypothesized that elevated serum estrogen levels during ovarian stimulation may induce breast tumour growth. This has led to the use of alternative stimulation protocols with addition of tamoxifen or letrozole. The effectiveness of these stimulation protocols in terms of oocyte yield is unknown., Methods/design: Randomized open-label trial comparing ovarian stimulation plus tamoxifen and ovarian stimulation plus letrozole with standard ovarian stimulation in the course of fertility preservation. The study population consists of women with breast cancer who opt for banking of oocytes or embryos, aged 18-43years at randomisation. Primary outcome is the number of oocytes retrieved at follicle aspiration. Secondary outcomes are number of mature oocytes retrieved, number of oocytes or embryos banked and peak E2 levels during ovarian stimulation., Discussion: Concerning the lack of evidence on which stimulation protocol should be used in women with breast cancer and the growing demand for fertility preservation, there is an urgent need to undertake this study. By performing this study, we will be able to closely monitor the effects of various stimulation protocols in women with breast cancer and pave the way for long term follow up on the safety of this procedure in terms of breast cancer prognosis., Trial Registration: NTR4108., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)