Rev Esp Quimioter 2015:28(6):295-301

Analysis of the concordance of antibiotic treatment for patients with severe sepsis in emergencies     


Objectives. Antibiotic treatment is vital in patients with severe sepsis/septic shock. The objectives were to assess the degree of concordance between antibiotic prescribed in emergencies and post requirements; to relate it to health outcomes (mortality) and to analyze the reasons for disagreement.
Material and methods. Retrospective descriptive study of antibiotic treatment prescribed in emergencies and the subsequent treatment in patients with criteria of severe sepsis/septic shock in 2013. We collected patient demographic characteristics, infectious focus, antibiotic prescribed from emergencies and subsequent changes. It was considered concordant if there were no changes, if there were changes, but the initial antibiotic was right and suspensions for end of treatment. Mortality and evolution were analyzed.
Results. Six hundred patients were included. A 60% experienced changes respect to the antibiotic treatment initiated in emergencies (87.6% justified), with a degree of overall antibiotic concordance of 47.5% The mortality rate at end-point was 9.83%, with no statistically significant relationship with the degree of concordance (OR=0.864 (0.503-1.484)/χ2=0.28; p=0.597). Reasons for change of antibiotic:  clinical outcome (17.96%), change of spectrum (35.03%), de-escalation (41.32%), sequential therapy (8.68%). An 11% required ICU admission. Clinical outcomes: resolution of the disease (79.2%), readmission after 30 days (7.7%) and transfer to health centers (4.5%). The median hospital stay was 7 days.
Conclusions. The degree of concordance antibiotic was quite high, and the mortality rate was lower than that described in the literature, without relating to the discordance. The presence of concordance was associated with fewer readmissions and ICU admissions. The main reasons for disagreement were inadequate spectrum selection and change after microbiological crops.

Rev Esp Quimioter 2015;28(6):295-301 [pdf]