CEA vs. stenting in the elderly: The debate continues

Define 'elderly'
Article Type
Changed
Tue, 12/13/2016 - 12:08
Display Headline
CEA vs. stenting in the elderly: The debate continues

For elderly patients with carotid disease, carotid endarterectomy carries a lower risk of perioperative stroke or transient ischemic attack, the same risk of perioperative MI, and a slightly higher risk of perioperative death compared with carotid artery stenting, according to a meta-analysis.

However, the individual elderly patient’s vascular anatomy plays a crucial role in determining perioperative risk, as does his or her overall health and clinical profile.

"The results of [our] analysis suggest that careful consideration of a constellation of clinical and anatomic factors is required before an appropriate treatment of carotid disease in elderly patients is selected. The cardiovascular disease burden and general health of the individual patient should be meticulously evaluated before interventional instead of optimal medical treatment is applied," said Dr. George A. Antoniou of the department of vascular surgery, Hellenic Red Cross Hospital, Athens, and his associates.

Which treatment is the most appropriate for elderly patients with carotid disease is still much debated. Dr. Antoniou and his colleagues performed a comprehensive review of the medical literature since 1986 and a meta-analysis of 44 articles that directly compared outcomes in elderly patients with those of younger patients after carotid endarterectomy (39 studies) or carotid stenting (18 articles).

"Elderly" was defined as older than 80 years in most of these studies, and as older than 75 years in many, but there was great variability among the studies, and some even considered "older than 65 years" to be elderly.

Overall, the meta-analysis included 269,596 endarterectomies in elderly patients against 243,089 in younger patients, and 38,751 carotid stenting procedures in elderly patients against 36,450 in younger patients.

For endarterectomy, the rate of perioperative stroke was not significantly different between elderly (0.9%) and younger (1.2%) patients, nor was the rate of TIA (1.9% vs 1.8%, respectively). However, perioperative mortality was significantly higher in elderly (0.5%) than in younger (0.4%) patients.

In contrast, for carotid stenting, the rate of perioperative stroke was significantly higher for elderly patients (2.4%) than for younger patients (1.7%), as was the rate of TIA (3.6% vs 2.1%). And mortality was not significantly different between elderly patients (0.6%) and younger patients (0.7%), the researchers wrote (JAMA Surg. 2013 Oct. 23 [doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2013.4135]).

Both procedures were associated with an increased rate of perioperative MI in elderly patients, compared with younger patients. These rates were 2.2% in elderly patients, compared with 1.4% in younger patients undergoing endarterectomy; and 2.3% in elderly patients, compared with 1.5% in younger patients undergoing carotid stenting.

These findings remained robust in sensitivity analyses.

"It seems that endarterectomy is associated with improved neurologic outcomes compared with carotid stenting in elderly patients, at the expense of increased perioperative mortality." However, the small increase in mortality seen with endarterectomy – one-tenth of 1% – may not be clinically significant, Dr. Antoniou and his associates said.

Moreover, neurologic risk is closely tied to vascular anatomy. Elderly patients tend to have more unfavorable anatomy than do younger patients, but should be assessed on an individual basis. Unfavorable traits include heavily calcified and tortuous supra-aortic branches, as well as adverse morphology of the aortic arch such as elongation, distortion, and stenosis.

Manipulating the stenting instruments through such features may in itself raise the risk of neurologic sequelae. It also makes the procedure more technically difficult, which increases the risk of endothelial trauma, thrombus dislodgment, and thromboembolic events.

"In addition, elderly patients with significant extracranial atherosclerotic disease are likely to have a compromised cerebrovascular reserve, which makes them more susceptible to ischemic events from cerebral microembolization," the researchers said.

They reported having no conflicts.

Body

This study’s conclusions are not surprising, given that most clinicians have already seen them both in randomized prospective studies and in their own practices, said Dr. R. Clement Darling III.

However, the variation in the definition of "elderly" among the trials in this meta-analysis is a real concern: 64% used 80 years as the cutoff, 31% used 75 years, and some used 70 or even 65 years as the cutoff.

"The bottom line is, carotid endarterectomy and carotid stenting seem to work equally well in younger patients, in expert hands. However, in the ‘elderly’ (at any age), endarterectomy has better outcomes with low morbidity, mortality, and stroke rate, and it remains the standard of care."

Dr. Darling of the Vascular Group, Albany, N.Y., made these remarks in an invited commentary (JAMA Surgery 2013 Oct. 23 [doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2013.4160]). He reported no financial conflicts of interest.

Author and Disclosure Information

Publications
Topics
Legacy Keywords
elderly patients, carotid disease, carotid endarterectomy, perioperative stroke, transient ischemic attack, perioperative MI, perioperative death, carotid artery stenting, vascular anatomy, perioperative risk
Author and Disclosure Information

Author and Disclosure Information

Body

This study’s conclusions are not surprising, given that most clinicians have already seen them both in randomized prospective studies and in their own practices, said Dr. R. Clement Darling III.

However, the variation in the definition of "elderly" among the trials in this meta-analysis is a real concern: 64% used 80 years as the cutoff, 31% used 75 years, and some used 70 or even 65 years as the cutoff.

"The bottom line is, carotid endarterectomy and carotid stenting seem to work equally well in younger patients, in expert hands. However, in the ‘elderly’ (at any age), endarterectomy has better outcomes with low morbidity, mortality, and stroke rate, and it remains the standard of care."

Dr. Darling of the Vascular Group, Albany, N.Y., made these remarks in an invited commentary (JAMA Surgery 2013 Oct. 23 [doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2013.4160]). He reported no financial conflicts of interest.

Body

This study’s conclusions are not surprising, given that most clinicians have already seen them both in randomized prospective studies and in their own practices, said Dr. R. Clement Darling III.

However, the variation in the definition of "elderly" among the trials in this meta-analysis is a real concern: 64% used 80 years as the cutoff, 31% used 75 years, and some used 70 or even 65 years as the cutoff.

"The bottom line is, carotid endarterectomy and carotid stenting seem to work equally well in younger patients, in expert hands. However, in the ‘elderly’ (at any age), endarterectomy has better outcomes with low morbidity, mortality, and stroke rate, and it remains the standard of care."

Dr. Darling of the Vascular Group, Albany, N.Y., made these remarks in an invited commentary (JAMA Surgery 2013 Oct. 23 [doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2013.4160]). He reported no financial conflicts of interest.

Title
Define 'elderly'
Define 'elderly'

For elderly patients with carotid disease, carotid endarterectomy carries a lower risk of perioperative stroke or transient ischemic attack, the same risk of perioperative MI, and a slightly higher risk of perioperative death compared with carotid artery stenting, according to a meta-analysis.

However, the individual elderly patient’s vascular anatomy plays a crucial role in determining perioperative risk, as does his or her overall health and clinical profile.

"The results of [our] analysis suggest that careful consideration of a constellation of clinical and anatomic factors is required before an appropriate treatment of carotid disease in elderly patients is selected. The cardiovascular disease burden and general health of the individual patient should be meticulously evaluated before interventional instead of optimal medical treatment is applied," said Dr. George A. Antoniou of the department of vascular surgery, Hellenic Red Cross Hospital, Athens, and his associates.

Which treatment is the most appropriate for elderly patients with carotid disease is still much debated. Dr. Antoniou and his colleagues performed a comprehensive review of the medical literature since 1986 and a meta-analysis of 44 articles that directly compared outcomes in elderly patients with those of younger patients after carotid endarterectomy (39 studies) or carotid stenting (18 articles).

"Elderly" was defined as older than 80 years in most of these studies, and as older than 75 years in many, but there was great variability among the studies, and some even considered "older than 65 years" to be elderly.

Overall, the meta-analysis included 269,596 endarterectomies in elderly patients against 243,089 in younger patients, and 38,751 carotid stenting procedures in elderly patients against 36,450 in younger patients.

For endarterectomy, the rate of perioperative stroke was not significantly different between elderly (0.9%) and younger (1.2%) patients, nor was the rate of TIA (1.9% vs 1.8%, respectively). However, perioperative mortality was significantly higher in elderly (0.5%) than in younger (0.4%) patients.

In contrast, for carotid stenting, the rate of perioperative stroke was significantly higher for elderly patients (2.4%) than for younger patients (1.7%), as was the rate of TIA (3.6% vs 2.1%). And mortality was not significantly different between elderly patients (0.6%) and younger patients (0.7%), the researchers wrote (JAMA Surg. 2013 Oct. 23 [doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2013.4135]).

Both procedures were associated with an increased rate of perioperative MI in elderly patients, compared with younger patients. These rates were 2.2% in elderly patients, compared with 1.4% in younger patients undergoing endarterectomy; and 2.3% in elderly patients, compared with 1.5% in younger patients undergoing carotid stenting.

These findings remained robust in sensitivity analyses.

"It seems that endarterectomy is associated with improved neurologic outcomes compared with carotid stenting in elderly patients, at the expense of increased perioperative mortality." However, the small increase in mortality seen with endarterectomy – one-tenth of 1% – may not be clinically significant, Dr. Antoniou and his associates said.

Moreover, neurologic risk is closely tied to vascular anatomy. Elderly patients tend to have more unfavorable anatomy than do younger patients, but should be assessed on an individual basis. Unfavorable traits include heavily calcified and tortuous supra-aortic branches, as well as adverse morphology of the aortic arch such as elongation, distortion, and stenosis.

Manipulating the stenting instruments through such features may in itself raise the risk of neurologic sequelae. It also makes the procedure more technically difficult, which increases the risk of endothelial trauma, thrombus dislodgment, and thromboembolic events.

"In addition, elderly patients with significant extracranial atherosclerotic disease are likely to have a compromised cerebrovascular reserve, which makes them more susceptible to ischemic events from cerebral microembolization," the researchers said.

They reported having no conflicts.

For elderly patients with carotid disease, carotid endarterectomy carries a lower risk of perioperative stroke or transient ischemic attack, the same risk of perioperative MI, and a slightly higher risk of perioperative death compared with carotid artery stenting, according to a meta-analysis.

However, the individual elderly patient’s vascular anatomy plays a crucial role in determining perioperative risk, as does his or her overall health and clinical profile.

"The results of [our] analysis suggest that careful consideration of a constellation of clinical and anatomic factors is required before an appropriate treatment of carotid disease in elderly patients is selected. The cardiovascular disease burden and general health of the individual patient should be meticulously evaluated before interventional instead of optimal medical treatment is applied," said Dr. George A. Antoniou of the department of vascular surgery, Hellenic Red Cross Hospital, Athens, and his associates.

Which treatment is the most appropriate for elderly patients with carotid disease is still much debated. Dr. Antoniou and his colleagues performed a comprehensive review of the medical literature since 1986 and a meta-analysis of 44 articles that directly compared outcomes in elderly patients with those of younger patients after carotid endarterectomy (39 studies) or carotid stenting (18 articles).

"Elderly" was defined as older than 80 years in most of these studies, and as older than 75 years in many, but there was great variability among the studies, and some even considered "older than 65 years" to be elderly.

Overall, the meta-analysis included 269,596 endarterectomies in elderly patients against 243,089 in younger patients, and 38,751 carotid stenting procedures in elderly patients against 36,450 in younger patients.

For endarterectomy, the rate of perioperative stroke was not significantly different between elderly (0.9%) and younger (1.2%) patients, nor was the rate of TIA (1.9% vs 1.8%, respectively). However, perioperative mortality was significantly higher in elderly (0.5%) than in younger (0.4%) patients.

In contrast, for carotid stenting, the rate of perioperative stroke was significantly higher for elderly patients (2.4%) than for younger patients (1.7%), as was the rate of TIA (3.6% vs 2.1%). And mortality was not significantly different between elderly patients (0.6%) and younger patients (0.7%), the researchers wrote (JAMA Surg. 2013 Oct. 23 [doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2013.4135]).

Both procedures were associated with an increased rate of perioperative MI in elderly patients, compared with younger patients. These rates were 2.2% in elderly patients, compared with 1.4% in younger patients undergoing endarterectomy; and 2.3% in elderly patients, compared with 1.5% in younger patients undergoing carotid stenting.

These findings remained robust in sensitivity analyses.

"It seems that endarterectomy is associated with improved neurologic outcomes compared with carotid stenting in elderly patients, at the expense of increased perioperative mortality." However, the small increase in mortality seen with endarterectomy – one-tenth of 1% – may not be clinically significant, Dr. Antoniou and his associates said.

Moreover, neurologic risk is closely tied to vascular anatomy. Elderly patients tend to have more unfavorable anatomy than do younger patients, but should be assessed on an individual basis. Unfavorable traits include heavily calcified and tortuous supra-aortic branches, as well as adverse morphology of the aortic arch such as elongation, distortion, and stenosis.

Manipulating the stenting instruments through such features may in itself raise the risk of neurologic sequelae. It also makes the procedure more technically difficult, which increases the risk of endothelial trauma, thrombus dislodgment, and thromboembolic events.

"In addition, elderly patients with significant extracranial atherosclerotic disease are likely to have a compromised cerebrovascular reserve, which makes them more susceptible to ischemic events from cerebral microembolization," the researchers said.

They reported having no conflicts.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
CEA vs. stenting in the elderly: The debate continues
Display Headline
CEA vs. stenting in the elderly: The debate continues
Legacy Keywords
elderly patients, carotid disease, carotid endarterectomy, perioperative stroke, transient ischemic attack, perioperative MI, perioperative death, carotid artery stenting, vascular anatomy, perioperative risk
Legacy Keywords
elderly patients, carotid disease, carotid endarterectomy, perioperative stroke, transient ischemic attack, perioperative MI, perioperative death, carotid artery stenting, vascular anatomy, perioperative risk
Article Source

PURLs Copyright

Inside the Article

Ibrutinib trial stopped early

Article Type
Changed
Mon, 01/27/2014 - 06:00
Display Headline
Ibrutinib trial stopped early

Prescription bottles

Credit: Steven Harbour

The phase 3 RESONATE study has been stopped early due to positive results in patients receiving ibrutinib.

In this trial, researchers compared the BTK inhibitor ibrutinib to the CD20-directed antibody ofatumumab in patients with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) or small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL).

The study has ended early because 2 key endpoints were met—namely, ibrutinib significantly improved progression-free and overall survival rates.

The RESONATE study enrolled 391 patients with relapsed or refractory CLL or SLL with measurable nodal disease who were not eligible for treatment with purine-analog-based therapy. Patients had received at least 1 prior therapy.

The researchers randomized patients to receive 420 mg of ibrutinib orally once daily or intravenous doses of ofatumumab over the course of 24 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity.

At the planned interim analysis, ibrutinib had significantly improved progression-free survival (the primary endpoint) and overall survival (a secondary endpoint).

And the safety profile of ibrutinib was acceptable, according to the companies developing the drug (Pharmacyclics, Inc. and Janssen Research and Development, LLC).

Based on these results, an independent data monitoring committee recommended that patients in the ofatumumab arm be given access to ibrutinib.

Pharmacyclics has informed the US Food and Drug Administration of this recommendation, and Janssen has informed the European Medicines Agency. Both companies are in talks with the health authorities to define the next regulatory steps.

Pharmacyclics has said detailed data from the RESONATE study will be presented at an upcoming oncology conference.

Ibrutinib was recently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration to treat mantle cell lymphoma.

Publications
Topics

Prescription bottles

Credit: Steven Harbour

The phase 3 RESONATE study has been stopped early due to positive results in patients receiving ibrutinib.

In this trial, researchers compared the BTK inhibitor ibrutinib to the CD20-directed antibody ofatumumab in patients with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) or small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL).

The study has ended early because 2 key endpoints were met—namely, ibrutinib significantly improved progression-free and overall survival rates.

The RESONATE study enrolled 391 patients with relapsed or refractory CLL or SLL with measurable nodal disease who were not eligible for treatment with purine-analog-based therapy. Patients had received at least 1 prior therapy.

The researchers randomized patients to receive 420 mg of ibrutinib orally once daily or intravenous doses of ofatumumab over the course of 24 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity.

At the planned interim analysis, ibrutinib had significantly improved progression-free survival (the primary endpoint) and overall survival (a secondary endpoint).

And the safety profile of ibrutinib was acceptable, according to the companies developing the drug (Pharmacyclics, Inc. and Janssen Research and Development, LLC).

Based on these results, an independent data monitoring committee recommended that patients in the ofatumumab arm be given access to ibrutinib.

Pharmacyclics has informed the US Food and Drug Administration of this recommendation, and Janssen has informed the European Medicines Agency. Both companies are in talks with the health authorities to define the next regulatory steps.

Pharmacyclics has said detailed data from the RESONATE study will be presented at an upcoming oncology conference.

Ibrutinib was recently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration to treat mantle cell lymphoma.

Prescription bottles

Credit: Steven Harbour

The phase 3 RESONATE study has been stopped early due to positive results in patients receiving ibrutinib.

In this trial, researchers compared the BTK inhibitor ibrutinib to the CD20-directed antibody ofatumumab in patients with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) or small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL).

The study has ended early because 2 key endpoints were met—namely, ibrutinib significantly improved progression-free and overall survival rates.

The RESONATE study enrolled 391 patients with relapsed or refractory CLL or SLL with measurable nodal disease who were not eligible for treatment with purine-analog-based therapy. Patients had received at least 1 prior therapy.

The researchers randomized patients to receive 420 mg of ibrutinib orally once daily or intravenous doses of ofatumumab over the course of 24 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity.

At the planned interim analysis, ibrutinib had significantly improved progression-free survival (the primary endpoint) and overall survival (a secondary endpoint).

And the safety profile of ibrutinib was acceptable, according to the companies developing the drug (Pharmacyclics, Inc. and Janssen Research and Development, LLC).

Based on these results, an independent data monitoring committee recommended that patients in the ofatumumab arm be given access to ibrutinib.

Pharmacyclics has informed the US Food and Drug Administration of this recommendation, and Janssen has informed the European Medicines Agency. Both companies are in talks with the health authorities to define the next regulatory steps.

Pharmacyclics has said detailed data from the RESONATE study will be presented at an upcoming oncology conference.

Ibrutinib was recently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration to treat mantle cell lymphoma.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Ibrutinib trial stopped early
Display Headline
Ibrutinib trial stopped early
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica

Music therapy helps AYAs undergoing HSCT

Article Type
Changed
Mon, 01/27/2014 - 06:00
Display Headline
Music therapy helps AYAs undergoing HSCT

Stem cells for transplant

Credit: Chad McNeeley

A music therapy intervention can help adolescents and young adults (AYAs) cope with cancer and its treatment, according to research published in the journal Cancer.

The intervention consisted of writing song lyrics and producing music videos.

It helped AYA cancer patients communicate their feelings about their disease and its treatment, hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT).

The program also had positive effects on patients’ social integration and family environment.

About the intervention

The therapeutic music video (TMV) intervention was designed to improve resilience in AYA cancer patients undergoing HSCT. Resilience is the process of positively adjusting to stressors.

“Adolescents and young adults who are resilient have the ability to rise above their illness, gain a sense of mastery and confidence in how they have dealt with their cancer, and demonstrate a desire to reach out and help others,” said study author Joan Haase, PhD, RN, of the Indiana University School of Nursing.

Dr Haase and her colleagues wanted to use the TMV intervention to help AYAs explore and express thoughts and emotions about their disease and treatment that might otherwise go unspoken.

The patients did this by writing song lyrics and producing videos with the help of a board-certified music therapist. As they moved through phases of the intervention—making sound recordings, collecting video images, and storyboarding—patients had opportunities to involve family, friends, and healthcare providers in their project.

Results of the study

To test the intervention, Dr Haase and her colleagues enrolled 113 cancer patients (aged 11 to 24 years) who were undergoing HSCT.

The patients were randomized to the TMV intervention group or a control group that received audiobooks. All patients completed 6 sessions over 3 weeks.

After the intervention, the TMV group reported significantly better courageous coping. And at 100 days after HSCT, the TMV group reported significantly better social integration and family environments.

Parents reported that the videos gave them insight into their children’s cancer experiences. However, parents needed help to initiate and sustain conversations about messages shared through their children’s videos.

The investigators said these findings provide evidence supporting the use of a music-based intervention delivered by a music therapist to help AYAs cope with high-risk, high-intensity cancer treatments.

“The availability of music therapy services from a board-certified music therapist in the United States has become more widespread, and, through studies like this one, we hope to see increased availability and access to this important allied health service,” said study author Sheri L. Robb, PhD, also of the Indiana University School of Nursing.

“One of our team’s next steps is to disseminate findings, train professional music therapists on this intervention, and then conduct an implementation study to examine how the intervention may change as it moves into the standard care setting and whether, in the presence of these changes, patient benefits are maintained.”

Publications
Topics

Stem cells for transplant

Credit: Chad McNeeley

A music therapy intervention can help adolescents and young adults (AYAs) cope with cancer and its treatment, according to research published in the journal Cancer.

The intervention consisted of writing song lyrics and producing music videos.

It helped AYA cancer patients communicate their feelings about their disease and its treatment, hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT).

The program also had positive effects on patients’ social integration and family environment.

About the intervention

The therapeutic music video (TMV) intervention was designed to improve resilience in AYA cancer patients undergoing HSCT. Resilience is the process of positively adjusting to stressors.

“Adolescents and young adults who are resilient have the ability to rise above their illness, gain a sense of mastery and confidence in how they have dealt with their cancer, and demonstrate a desire to reach out and help others,” said study author Joan Haase, PhD, RN, of the Indiana University School of Nursing.

Dr Haase and her colleagues wanted to use the TMV intervention to help AYAs explore and express thoughts and emotions about their disease and treatment that might otherwise go unspoken.

The patients did this by writing song lyrics and producing videos with the help of a board-certified music therapist. As they moved through phases of the intervention—making sound recordings, collecting video images, and storyboarding—patients had opportunities to involve family, friends, and healthcare providers in their project.

Results of the study

To test the intervention, Dr Haase and her colleagues enrolled 113 cancer patients (aged 11 to 24 years) who were undergoing HSCT.

The patients were randomized to the TMV intervention group or a control group that received audiobooks. All patients completed 6 sessions over 3 weeks.

After the intervention, the TMV group reported significantly better courageous coping. And at 100 days after HSCT, the TMV group reported significantly better social integration and family environments.

Parents reported that the videos gave them insight into their children’s cancer experiences. However, parents needed help to initiate and sustain conversations about messages shared through their children’s videos.

The investigators said these findings provide evidence supporting the use of a music-based intervention delivered by a music therapist to help AYAs cope with high-risk, high-intensity cancer treatments.

“The availability of music therapy services from a board-certified music therapist in the United States has become more widespread, and, through studies like this one, we hope to see increased availability and access to this important allied health service,” said study author Sheri L. Robb, PhD, also of the Indiana University School of Nursing.

“One of our team’s next steps is to disseminate findings, train professional music therapists on this intervention, and then conduct an implementation study to examine how the intervention may change as it moves into the standard care setting and whether, in the presence of these changes, patient benefits are maintained.”

Stem cells for transplant

Credit: Chad McNeeley

A music therapy intervention can help adolescents and young adults (AYAs) cope with cancer and its treatment, according to research published in the journal Cancer.

The intervention consisted of writing song lyrics and producing music videos.

It helped AYA cancer patients communicate their feelings about their disease and its treatment, hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT).

The program also had positive effects on patients’ social integration and family environment.

About the intervention

The therapeutic music video (TMV) intervention was designed to improve resilience in AYA cancer patients undergoing HSCT. Resilience is the process of positively adjusting to stressors.

“Adolescents and young adults who are resilient have the ability to rise above their illness, gain a sense of mastery and confidence in how they have dealt with their cancer, and demonstrate a desire to reach out and help others,” said study author Joan Haase, PhD, RN, of the Indiana University School of Nursing.

Dr Haase and her colleagues wanted to use the TMV intervention to help AYAs explore and express thoughts and emotions about their disease and treatment that might otherwise go unspoken.

The patients did this by writing song lyrics and producing videos with the help of a board-certified music therapist. As they moved through phases of the intervention—making sound recordings, collecting video images, and storyboarding—patients had opportunities to involve family, friends, and healthcare providers in their project.

Results of the study

To test the intervention, Dr Haase and her colleagues enrolled 113 cancer patients (aged 11 to 24 years) who were undergoing HSCT.

The patients were randomized to the TMV intervention group or a control group that received audiobooks. All patients completed 6 sessions over 3 weeks.

After the intervention, the TMV group reported significantly better courageous coping. And at 100 days after HSCT, the TMV group reported significantly better social integration and family environments.

Parents reported that the videos gave them insight into their children’s cancer experiences. However, parents needed help to initiate and sustain conversations about messages shared through their children’s videos.

The investigators said these findings provide evidence supporting the use of a music-based intervention delivered by a music therapist to help AYAs cope with high-risk, high-intensity cancer treatments.

“The availability of music therapy services from a board-certified music therapist in the United States has become more widespread, and, through studies like this one, we hope to see increased availability and access to this important allied health service,” said study author Sheri L. Robb, PhD, also of the Indiana University School of Nursing.

“One of our team’s next steps is to disseminate findings, train professional music therapists on this intervention, and then conduct an implementation study to examine how the intervention may change as it moves into the standard care setting and whether, in the presence of these changes, patient benefits are maintained.”

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Music therapy helps AYAs undergoing HSCT
Display Headline
Music therapy helps AYAs undergoing HSCT
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica

Does vaginal prolapse repair using synthetic mesh confer long-term benefit over native-tissue colpopexy?

Article Type
Changed
Tue, 08/28/2018 - 11:03
Display Headline
Does vaginal prolapse repair using synthetic mesh confer long-term benefit over native-tissue colpopexy?


This is the third report from Gutman and colleagues on the outcomes of a double-blind, multicenter, randomized, controlled trial of vaginal prolapse repair using synthetic mesh versus native-tissue colpopexy in women with significant vaginal prolapse.

The trial involved 33 women who underwent mesh repair and 32 who underwent repair without mesh. (The mesh-free repair consisted primarily of uterosacral suspension and concurrent colporrhaphy.) It was halted when it reached a predetermined threshold for discontinuation, which was a mesh erosion rate of 15% or more.

Investigators found no difference in long-term cure rates between the mesh and no-mesh groups, regardless of the definition of cure (ie, anatomic, symptomatic, or combined). Nor was there a difference in the overall recurrence rate.

Summary of earlier reports
Three-month outcomes.
The first report from this trial described 3-month objective treatment outcomes, with success described as prolapse no greater than stage 1.1 It found a high erosion rate (15.6%) for vaginal mesh, with no differences between groups in overall subjective or objective cure rates, with an overall recurrence rate of 59.4% (19 cases) in the mesh group versus 70.4% (24 cases) in the no-mesh group (P = .28), with recurrence defined as prolapse beyond stage 1 in any compartment. Investigators also observed potential benefit in the mesh group in the anterior vaginal wall at point Ba at a median of 9.7 months after surgery.

Related Article: Stop using synthetic mesh for routine repair of pelvic organ prolapse Cheryl B. Iglesia, MD (Stop/Start, April 2013)

One-year outcomes. The second report described 1-year objective and functional outcomes in all participants of the trial.2 It found comparable objective and subjective cure rates between groups but a higher reoperation rate for mesh repairs. Prolapse recurred in the anterior department in 46.9% of women in the mesh group versus 60.6% in the no-mesh group (P = .40).

Subjective quality-of-life assessments continued to reflect significant improvement in symptoms from baseline. Vaginal bulging was relieved in 96.2% of women in the mesh group, compared with 90.9% in the no-mesh group (P = .62).

More women in the mesh group required reoperation for recurrent prolapse or mesh exposure (5 in the mesh group vs 0 in the no-mesh group; P = .017).

Strengths and limitations of the trial
Gutman and colleagues are to be congratulated for continuing to monitor longer-term outcomes of vaginal prolapse repairs augmented with synthetic mesh, as data are sorely needed on both early complications and those more remote from surgery. However, it is regrettable that continued attrition in this trial led to minimal power to compare outcomes between groups.

Cure rates were assessed three ways: anatomically, by virtue of symptoms, and by a combination of the two measures. Participants had documentation of at least 2-year anatomic outcomes and 3-year subjective outcomes using validated measures. 

Forty-one (63%) of the original 65 women in the trial had anatomic outcomes (20 in the mesh group vs 21 in the no-mesh group), and 51 (78%) of the original 65 women had evaluable subjective outcomes (25 in the mesh group vs 26 in the no-mesh group).

Women who underwent reoperation for recurrent prolapse were removed from any outcomes analysis and considered to have failed composite outcomes measures (anatomic and subjective assessment and whether reoperation or a pessary was required for recurrent prolapse).

The length of follow-up was similar between groups (median, 3 years; interquartile range, 2.97–3.15), and both groups demonstrated significant anatomic and subjective improvement from baseline.

No difference was observed between groups in the original primary anatomic outcome, which was a POP-Q stage no greater than 1 (45% in the mesh group vs 43% in the no-mesh group; P >.99). Nor was there a difference between groups in any other anatomic outcome, including POP-Q point Ba (median, –1.5 for mesh [range, –2.5, 1.0] vs –0.5 [range, –3.0, 4.0] for the no-mesh group; P = .21) and bulge symptoms (92% for the mesh group vs 81% for the no-mesh group; relative risk, 1.4; 95% confidence interval, 0.91–1.42).

Despite small numbers and markedly reduced comparative validity (readily acknowledged by the investigators), these longer-term outcomes were assessed by examiners blinded to treatment and using validated objective and subjective outcome measures.

The only other randomized trial of mesh versus native-tissue repair with 3-year outcomes had a much larger sample size and follow-up but addressed only anterior-compartment prolapse.3

What this evidence means for practice
The 3-year data presented by Gutman and colleagues should be viewed with caution, owing to the trial’s reduced sample size and power. However, they may be useful in designing future trials.
In the meantime, given the limited longer-term outcomes data available at present, I would recommend continued individualized use of mesh versus native-tissue repair in women presenting with prolapse, including educating patients about the risks and benefits of both approaches. It also is important that outcomes be followed in all of our patients in a robust, unbiased fashion. The new American Urogynecologic Society Pelvic Floor Disorders Registry provides the opportunity for this.
Holly E. Richter, PhD, MD

 

 

WE WANT TO HEAR FROM YOU!
Drop us a line and let us know what you think about current articles, which topics you'd like to see covered in future issues, and what challenges you face in daily practice. Tell us what you think by emailing us at: [email protected]

References

  1. Iglesia CB, Sokol AI, Sokol ER, et al. Vaginal mesh for prolapse: A randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;116(2 Pt 1):293–303.
  2. Sokol AI, Iglesia CB, Kudish BI, et al. One-year objective and functional outcomes of a randomized clinical trial of vaginal mesh for prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;206(1):86.e1–e9.
  3. Nieminen K, Hiltunen R, Takala T, et al. Outcomes after anterior vaginal wall repair with mesh: A randomized, controlled trial with a 3-year follow-up. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010;203(3):235.e1–e8.
Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

EXPERT COMMENTARY

Holly E. Richter, PhD, MD, is the J. Marion Sims Professor of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Urology and Geriatrics, and Director of the Division of Urogynecology and Pelvic Reconstructive Surgery, University of Alabama at Birmingham.

The author reports no financial relationships relevant to this article.

Issue
OBG Management - 26(2)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
72,71
Legacy Keywords
Holly Richter,vaginal prolapse repair,synthetic mesh,native-tissue colpopexy,Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification,POP-Q,colporrhaphy,uterosacral suspension,erosion rate,pelvic organ prolapse,POP,reoperation rate,vaginal bulging,mesh exposure,
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

EXPERT COMMENTARY

Holly E. Richter, PhD, MD, is the J. Marion Sims Professor of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Urology and Geriatrics, and Director of the Division of Urogynecology and Pelvic Reconstructive Surgery, University of Alabama at Birmingham.

The author reports no financial relationships relevant to this article.

Author and Disclosure Information

EXPERT COMMENTARY

Holly E. Richter, PhD, MD, is the J. Marion Sims Professor of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Urology and Geriatrics, and Director of the Division of Urogynecology and Pelvic Reconstructive Surgery, University of Alabama at Birmingham.

The author reports no financial relationships relevant to this article.

Article PDF
Article PDF
Related Articles


This is the third report from Gutman and colleagues on the outcomes of a double-blind, multicenter, randomized, controlled trial of vaginal prolapse repair using synthetic mesh versus native-tissue colpopexy in women with significant vaginal prolapse.

The trial involved 33 women who underwent mesh repair and 32 who underwent repair without mesh. (The mesh-free repair consisted primarily of uterosacral suspension and concurrent colporrhaphy.) It was halted when it reached a predetermined threshold for discontinuation, which was a mesh erosion rate of 15% or more.

Investigators found no difference in long-term cure rates between the mesh and no-mesh groups, regardless of the definition of cure (ie, anatomic, symptomatic, or combined). Nor was there a difference in the overall recurrence rate.

Summary of earlier reports
Three-month outcomes.
The first report from this trial described 3-month objective treatment outcomes, with success described as prolapse no greater than stage 1.1 It found a high erosion rate (15.6%) for vaginal mesh, with no differences between groups in overall subjective or objective cure rates, with an overall recurrence rate of 59.4% (19 cases) in the mesh group versus 70.4% (24 cases) in the no-mesh group (P = .28), with recurrence defined as prolapse beyond stage 1 in any compartment. Investigators also observed potential benefit in the mesh group in the anterior vaginal wall at point Ba at a median of 9.7 months after surgery.

Related Article: Stop using synthetic mesh for routine repair of pelvic organ prolapse Cheryl B. Iglesia, MD (Stop/Start, April 2013)

One-year outcomes. The second report described 1-year objective and functional outcomes in all participants of the trial.2 It found comparable objective and subjective cure rates between groups but a higher reoperation rate for mesh repairs. Prolapse recurred in the anterior department in 46.9% of women in the mesh group versus 60.6% in the no-mesh group (P = .40).

Subjective quality-of-life assessments continued to reflect significant improvement in symptoms from baseline. Vaginal bulging was relieved in 96.2% of women in the mesh group, compared with 90.9% in the no-mesh group (P = .62).

More women in the mesh group required reoperation for recurrent prolapse or mesh exposure (5 in the mesh group vs 0 in the no-mesh group; P = .017).

Strengths and limitations of the trial
Gutman and colleagues are to be congratulated for continuing to monitor longer-term outcomes of vaginal prolapse repairs augmented with synthetic mesh, as data are sorely needed on both early complications and those more remote from surgery. However, it is regrettable that continued attrition in this trial led to minimal power to compare outcomes between groups.

Cure rates were assessed three ways: anatomically, by virtue of symptoms, and by a combination of the two measures. Participants had documentation of at least 2-year anatomic outcomes and 3-year subjective outcomes using validated measures. 

Forty-one (63%) of the original 65 women in the trial had anatomic outcomes (20 in the mesh group vs 21 in the no-mesh group), and 51 (78%) of the original 65 women had evaluable subjective outcomes (25 in the mesh group vs 26 in the no-mesh group).

Women who underwent reoperation for recurrent prolapse were removed from any outcomes analysis and considered to have failed composite outcomes measures (anatomic and subjective assessment and whether reoperation or a pessary was required for recurrent prolapse).

The length of follow-up was similar between groups (median, 3 years; interquartile range, 2.97–3.15), and both groups demonstrated significant anatomic and subjective improvement from baseline.

No difference was observed between groups in the original primary anatomic outcome, which was a POP-Q stage no greater than 1 (45% in the mesh group vs 43% in the no-mesh group; P >.99). Nor was there a difference between groups in any other anatomic outcome, including POP-Q point Ba (median, –1.5 for mesh [range, –2.5, 1.0] vs –0.5 [range, –3.0, 4.0] for the no-mesh group; P = .21) and bulge symptoms (92% for the mesh group vs 81% for the no-mesh group; relative risk, 1.4; 95% confidence interval, 0.91–1.42).

Despite small numbers and markedly reduced comparative validity (readily acknowledged by the investigators), these longer-term outcomes were assessed by examiners blinded to treatment and using validated objective and subjective outcome measures.

The only other randomized trial of mesh versus native-tissue repair with 3-year outcomes had a much larger sample size and follow-up but addressed only anterior-compartment prolapse.3

What this evidence means for practice
The 3-year data presented by Gutman and colleagues should be viewed with caution, owing to the trial’s reduced sample size and power. However, they may be useful in designing future trials.
In the meantime, given the limited longer-term outcomes data available at present, I would recommend continued individualized use of mesh versus native-tissue repair in women presenting with prolapse, including educating patients about the risks and benefits of both approaches. It also is important that outcomes be followed in all of our patients in a robust, unbiased fashion. The new American Urogynecologic Society Pelvic Floor Disorders Registry provides the opportunity for this.
Holly E. Richter, PhD, MD

 

 

WE WANT TO HEAR FROM YOU!
Drop us a line and let us know what you think about current articles, which topics you'd like to see covered in future issues, and what challenges you face in daily practice. Tell us what you think by emailing us at: [email protected]


This is the third report from Gutman and colleagues on the outcomes of a double-blind, multicenter, randomized, controlled trial of vaginal prolapse repair using synthetic mesh versus native-tissue colpopexy in women with significant vaginal prolapse.

The trial involved 33 women who underwent mesh repair and 32 who underwent repair without mesh. (The mesh-free repair consisted primarily of uterosacral suspension and concurrent colporrhaphy.) It was halted when it reached a predetermined threshold for discontinuation, which was a mesh erosion rate of 15% or more.

Investigators found no difference in long-term cure rates between the mesh and no-mesh groups, regardless of the definition of cure (ie, anatomic, symptomatic, or combined). Nor was there a difference in the overall recurrence rate.

Summary of earlier reports
Three-month outcomes.
The first report from this trial described 3-month objective treatment outcomes, with success described as prolapse no greater than stage 1.1 It found a high erosion rate (15.6%) for vaginal mesh, with no differences between groups in overall subjective or objective cure rates, with an overall recurrence rate of 59.4% (19 cases) in the mesh group versus 70.4% (24 cases) in the no-mesh group (P = .28), with recurrence defined as prolapse beyond stage 1 in any compartment. Investigators also observed potential benefit in the mesh group in the anterior vaginal wall at point Ba at a median of 9.7 months after surgery.

Related Article: Stop using synthetic mesh for routine repair of pelvic organ prolapse Cheryl B. Iglesia, MD (Stop/Start, April 2013)

One-year outcomes. The second report described 1-year objective and functional outcomes in all participants of the trial.2 It found comparable objective and subjective cure rates between groups but a higher reoperation rate for mesh repairs. Prolapse recurred in the anterior department in 46.9% of women in the mesh group versus 60.6% in the no-mesh group (P = .40).

Subjective quality-of-life assessments continued to reflect significant improvement in symptoms from baseline. Vaginal bulging was relieved in 96.2% of women in the mesh group, compared with 90.9% in the no-mesh group (P = .62).

More women in the mesh group required reoperation for recurrent prolapse or mesh exposure (5 in the mesh group vs 0 in the no-mesh group; P = .017).

Strengths and limitations of the trial
Gutman and colleagues are to be congratulated for continuing to monitor longer-term outcomes of vaginal prolapse repairs augmented with synthetic mesh, as data are sorely needed on both early complications and those more remote from surgery. However, it is regrettable that continued attrition in this trial led to minimal power to compare outcomes between groups.

Cure rates were assessed three ways: anatomically, by virtue of symptoms, and by a combination of the two measures. Participants had documentation of at least 2-year anatomic outcomes and 3-year subjective outcomes using validated measures. 

Forty-one (63%) of the original 65 women in the trial had anatomic outcomes (20 in the mesh group vs 21 in the no-mesh group), and 51 (78%) of the original 65 women had evaluable subjective outcomes (25 in the mesh group vs 26 in the no-mesh group).

Women who underwent reoperation for recurrent prolapse were removed from any outcomes analysis and considered to have failed composite outcomes measures (anatomic and subjective assessment and whether reoperation or a pessary was required for recurrent prolapse).

The length of follow-up was similar between groups (median, 3 years; interquartile range, 2.97–3.15), and both groups demonstrated significant anatomic and subjective improvement from baseline.

No difference was observed between groups in the original primary anatomic outcome, which was a POP-Q stage no greater than 1 (45% in the mesh group vs 43% in the no-mesh group; P >.99). Nor was there a difference between groups in any other anatomic outcome, including POP-Q point Ba (median, –1.5 for mesh [range, –2.5, 1.0] vs –0.5 [range, –3.0, 4.0] for the no-mesh group; P = .21) and bulge symptoms (92% for the mesh group vs 81% for the no-mesh group; relative risk, 1.4; 95% confidence interval, 0.91–1.42).

Despite small numbers and markedly reduced comparative validity (readily acknowledged by the investigators), these longer-term outcomes were assessed by examiners blinded to treatment and using validated objective and subjective outcome measures.

The only other randomized trial of mesh versus native-tissue repair with 3-year outcomes had a much larger sample size and follow-up but addressed only anterior-compartment prolapse.3

What this evidence means for practice
The 3-year data presented by Gutman and colleagues should be viewed with caution, owing to the trial’s reduced sample size and power. However, they may be useful in designing future trials.
In the meantime, given the limited longer-term outcomes data available at present, I would recommend continued individualized use of mesh versus native-tissue repair in women presenting with prolapse, including educating patients about the risks and benefits of both approaches. It also is important that outcomes be followed in all of our patients in a robust, unbiased fashion. The new American Urogynecologic Society Pelvic Floor Disorders Registry provides the opportunity for this.
Holly E. Richter, PhD, MD

 

 

WE WANT TO HEAR FROM YOU!
Drop us a line and let us know what you think about current articles, which topics you'd like to see covered in future issues, and what challenges you face in daily practice. Tell us what you think by emailing us at: [email protected]

References

  1. Iglesia CB, Sokol AI, Sokol ER, et al. Vaginal mesh for prolapse: A randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;116(2 Pt 1):293–303.
  2. Sokol AI, Iglesia CB, Kudish BI, et al. One-year objective and functional outcomes of a randomized clinical trial of vaginal mesh for prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;206(1):86.e1–e9.
  3. Nieminen K, Hiltunen R, Takala T, et al. Outcomes after anterior vaginal wall repair with mesh: A randomized, controlled trial with a 3-year follow-up. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010;203(3):235.e1–e8.
References

  1. Iglesia CB, Sokol AI, Sokol ER, et al. Vaginal mesh for prolapse: A randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;116(2 Pt 1):293–303.
  2. Sokol AI, Iglesia CB, Kudish BI, et al. One-year objective and functional outcomes of a randomized clinical trial of vaginal mesh for prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;206(1):86.e1–e9.
  3. Nieminen K, Hiltunen R, Takala T, et al. Outcomes after anterior vaginal wall repair with mesh: A randomized, controlled trial with a 3-year follow-up. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010;203(3):235.e1–e8.
Issue
OBG Management - 26(2)
Issue
OBG Management - 26(2)
Page Number
72,71
Page Number
72,71
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Does vaginal prolapse repair using synthetic mesh confer long-term benefit over native-tissue colpopexy?
Display Headline
Does vaginal prolapse repair using synthetic mesh confer long-term benefit over native-tissue colpopexy?
Legacy Keywords
Holly Richter,vaginal prolapse repair,synthetic mesh,native-tissue colpopexy,Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification,POP-Q,colporrhaphy,uterosacral suspension,erosion rate,pelvic organ prolapse,POP,reoperation rate,vaginal bulging,mesh exposure,
Legacy Keywords
Holly Richter,vaginal prolapse repair,synthetic mesh,native-tissue colpopexy,Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification,POP-Q,colporrhaphy,uterosacral suspension,erosion rate,pelvic organ prolapse,POP,reoperation rate,vaginal bulging,mesh exposure,
Sections
Article Source

PURLs Copyright

Inside the Article

Article PDF Media

Circumcision accident: $1.3M verdict

Article Type
Changed
Tue, 08/28/2018 - 11:03
Display Headline
Circumcision accident: $1.3M verdict

CIRCUMCISION ACCIDENT: $1.3M VERDICT
A newborn underwent circumcision
when 12 hours old. The ObGyn removed adhesions present between the foreskin and glans. After locking the Mogen clamp, the ObGyn amputated a 9-mm by 8-mm portion of the top of the penis along with the foreskin. The newborn was rushed to a children’s hospital where a pediatric urologist surgically reattached the amputated glans. The child’s penis is not cosmetically normal, with permanent scars and disfigurement. He has altered nerve sensation at and above the area of the amputation.
PARENTS’ CLAIM
The ObGyn improperly performed the circumcision. He failed to remove a sufficient amount of adhesions, pulled too much into the clamp, and amputated 30% of the distal portion of the glans.
PHYSICIAN’S DEFENSE
The ObGyn circumcised this child the same way he had performed more than 1,000 circumcisions. Multiple dense adhesions between the glans and foreskin caused the top of the penis to be inadvertently pulled through the clamp. Amputation is a known risk of the procedure.
VERDICT
A $1,357,901 Illinois verdict was returned.

WHAT CAUSED CHILD’S KIDNEY DISEASE?
At 36 weeks’ gestation,
a mother came to the emergency department (ED) with abdominal pain. She had proteinuria, elevated liver enzymes, and a low-normal platelet count. An ObGyn determined that the fetus was normal, and discharged her.
The patient returned 2 days later with internal bleeding and placental abruption. She was diagnosed with hemolysis, elevated liver enzymes, and low platelet count (HELLP syndrome). The child, born by cesarean delivery, had kidney failure that caused growth retardation. The child has received a kidney transplant.
PARENTS’ CLAIM The mother should not have been discharged from the hospital with abnormal findings.
DEFENDANTS’ DEFENSE
The case was settled during trial.
VERDICT
A $1 million New Jersey settlement was reached, of which $100,000 was provided to the mother.

Related Article: A stepwise approach to managing eclampsia and other hypertensive emergencies Baha M. Sibai, MD (October 2013)

EXCESSIVE FORCE BLAMED FOR ERB’S PALSY
Shoulder dystocia was encountered during delivery.
The child suffered a brachial plexus injury with Erb’s palsy. She received botulinum toxin injections and underwent nerve-graft surgery to restore some function. She has limited use of her right arm and a protruding right elbow.
PARENTS’ CLAIM
The ObGyn used excessive force in response to shoulder dystocia.
PHYSICIAN’S DEFENSE
The case was settled at trial.
VERDICT
A $1 million New Jersey settlement was placed in a structured payment fund to provide a net $1.78 million over the child’s lifetime. 

Related Article: You are the second responder to a shoulder dystocia emergency. What do you do first? Robert L. Barbieri, MD (Editorial, May 2013)

WAS WOMAN UNLAWFULLY SEEKING DRUGS?
A 30-year-old woman went to an ED
with pelvic pain and vaginal discharge. An ED physician conducted a physical exam. Blood tests indicated the patient had taken barbiturates, but the patient could not explain the findings. Determining no cause for her symptoms, the ED physician discharged the patient.
Just after she left, the ED physician found that the patient had several narcotics prescriptions and called the police. The patient was arrested and charged with unlawfully seeking drugs at the hospital. Criminal charges were later dismissed.
PATIENT’S CLAIM
The ED physician did not properly examine her; she was found to have endometriosis and underwent surgery a few weeks later. The ED physician was negligent for divulging her personal information to police.
The ED physician had had his physician’s license suspended due to substance abuse and had also been arrested for driving under the influence after his license was restored.
PHYSICIAN’S DEFENSE
The ED physician’s examination and treatment were proper. The phone call to police was not part of treatment. The patient had a malicious prosecution basis for any claims.
VERDICT
A $125,000 Kentucky verdict was returned.

CASCADING PROBLEMS: MOTHER AND BABY DIE
A pregnant woman was admitted to an ED,
where the on-call physician determined that she had pneumonia. The patient’s ObGyn, 45 miles away, refused to come to the hospital or arrange for another ObGyn to take the case.
Several hours later, after the mother was found to have fulminant preeclampsia, the ObGyn demanded the patient be moved to the hospital’s internal medicine (IM) service. However, the IM service refused to admit the patient because she needed obstetric care. The ObGyn tried to transfer the patient to a maternal-fetal medicine (MFM) specialist at a tertiary care center; transfer was refused because the patient was too unstable and needed an emergency cesarean delivery. The ObGyn continued to refuse to relinquish care to another ObGyn.
The ED physician decided to transfer the patient to another hospital 50 miles away even though she was now in active labor. An MFM specialist accepted transfer. After 5 hours in the ED, the mother left by ambulance, but, during transport, she suffered placental abruption and internal hemorrhaging. She was in critical condition upon arrival. An emergency cesarean delivery was performed, but the mother died. The baby, born with severe brain damage, also died.
ESTATES’ CLAIM
The ED physician failed to properly and timely determine that the mother had preeclampsia; no treatment for hypertension was provided. The ED physician withheld critical information, including the patient’s severe hypertension, proteinurea, and edema, when speaking to the MFM specialist who accepted transfer. The ED physician did not evaluate the mother before departure and certified the transfer although the patient was highly unstable.
The ObGyn was negligent in not transferring care to another ObGyn and not coming to the hospital. The ObGyn did not inform the ED physician of the rejected attempt to transfer the patient or of the first MFM specialist’s recommendation for emergency cesarean. Both mother and baby could have survived with proper treatment.
DEFENDANTS’ DEFENSE
The case was settled at trial. 
VERDICT
A $900,000 Michigan settlement was reached.

 

 

FECAL INCONTINENCE AFTER EPISIOTOMY
A 26-year-old woman gave birth
after her ObGyn created an episiotomy to facilitate delivery. The incision was repaired and the ObGyn prescribed docusate (Colace) to soften her stools.
A month later, the patient report-ed fecal incontinence. The ObGyn determined that the incontinence was related to the episiotomy, but did not feel that immediate attention was needed. When the condition did not improve, the patient saw a colorectal surgeon, who diagnosed a significant sphincter defect. The patient underwent a sphincteroplasty, with minor improvement.
PATIENT’S CLAIM
The ObGyn failed to properly manage episiotomy healing. The patient remembers being told to stop docusate after she had passed one stool after delivery. A 10-day regimen of docusate and a diet to reduce defecation frequency should have been prescribed. Incontinence should have prompted an immediate referral to a colorectal surgeon.
PHYSICIAN’S DEFENSE
Prompt surgical intervention was not necessary. Sphincteroplasty can be delayed until conservative methods have been tried. Episiotomy healing was properly addressed. Permanent incontinence is a known risk of the procedure.
VERDICT
A $6 million New York verdict was returned.

Related Article: Does mediolateral episiotomy reduce the risk of anal sphincter injury in operative vaginal delivery? Errol R. Norwitz, MD, PhD (Examining the Evidence, August 2012)

MECONIUM ASPIRATION SYNDROME
A baby stayed in hospital for 3 weeks
postdelivery due to meconium aspiration syndrome.
PARENTS’ CLAIM
The resident who followed the mother during her pregnancy was negligent in allowing the pregnancy to progress to 46 weeks’ gestation before delivery.
DEFENDANTS’ DEFENSE
The estimated date of conception was disputed. The resident claimed that the baby was born at 42 weeks’ gestation. An attending physician reviewed all prenatal visits with the resident. The mother’s cervix was never ripe before induction of labor. Aspiration occurred despite aggressive suctioning. The child has had no further respiratory issues since her neonatal discharge.
VERDICT
An Illinois defense verdict was returned.  

BOWEL INJURY AFTER HYSTERECTOMY
A woman underwent laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy
and was discharged the following day. Two days later, she went to an ED in acute distress. A bowel perforation was found during emergency surgery, and her colon was repaired. She made a full recovery.
PATIENT’S CLAIM
The ObGyn was negligent in failing to properly evaluate the patient after surgery. The ObGyn also failed to explain the signs of a possible perforation to the patient before she left the hospital.
PHYSICIAN’S DEFENSE The patient’s postoperative course was normal while she was hospitalized. Bowel perforation is a known complication of the procedure. The patient had been informed of all the signs and symptoms of a bowel perforation and had been instructed to call the ObGyn or return to the hospital if she began to have any symptoms.
VERDICT
A South Carolina defense verdict was returned.

These cases were selected by the editors of OBG Management from Medical Malpractice Verdicts, Settlements & Experts, with permission of the editor, Lewis Laska (www.verdictslaska.com). The information available to the editors about the cases presented here is sometimes incomplete. Moreover, the cases may or may not have merit. Nevertheless, these cases represent the types of clinical situations that typically result in litigation and are meant to illustrate nationwide variation in jury verdicts and awards.

WE WANT TO HEAR FROM YOU!
Drop us a line and let us know what you think about current articles, which topics you'd like to see covered in future issues, and what challenges you face in daily practice. Tell us what you think by emailing us at: [email protected]

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Issue
OBG Management - 26(2)
Publications
Page Number
66-67
Legacy Keywords
medical verdicts,medical malpractice,circumcision accident,kidney disease,HELLP syndrome,hemolysis,elevated liver enzymes,low platelet count,Erb's palsy,shoulder dystocia,pelvic pain,endometriosis,unlawfully seeking drugs,fulminant preeclampsia,emergency cesarean,fecal incontinence,episiotomy,docusate,meconium aspiration syndrome,hysterectomy,bowel injury,Medical Malpractice Verdicts Settlements & Experts,Lewis Laska
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Author and Disclosure Information

Article PDF
Article PDF
Related Articles

CIRCUMCISION ACCIDENT: $1.3M VERDICT
A newborn underwent circumcision
when 12 hours old. The ObGyn removed adhesions present between the foreskin and glans. After locking the Mogen clamp, the ObGyn amputated a 9-mm by 8-mm portion of the top of the penis along with the foreskin. The newborn was rushed to a children’s hospital where a pediatric urologist surgically reattached the amputated glans. The child’s penis is not cosmetically normal, with permanent scars and disfigurement. He has altered nerve sensation at and above the area of the amputation.
PARENTS’ CLAIM
The ObGyn improperly performed the circumcision. He failed to remove a sufficient amount of adhesions, pulled too much into the clamp, and amputated 30% of the distal portion of the glans.
PHYSICIAN’S DEFENSE
The ObGyn circumcised this child the same way he had performed more than 1,000 circumcisions. Multiple dense adhesions between the glans and foreskin caused the top of the penis to be inadvertently pulled through the clamp. Amputation is a known risk of the procedure.
VERDICT
A $1,357,901 Illinois verdict was returned.

WHAT CAUSED CHILD’S KIDNEY DISEASE?
At 36 weeks’ gestation,
a mother came to the emergency department (ED) with abdominal pain. She had proteinuria, elevated liver enzymes, and a low-normal platelet count. An ObGyn determined that the fetus was normal, and discharged her.
The patient returned 2 days later with internal bleeding and placental abruption. She was diagnosed with hemolysis, elevated liver enzymes, and low platelet count (HELLP syndrome). The child, born by cesarean delivery, had kidney failure that caused growth retardation. The child has received a kidney transplant.
PARENTS’ CLAIM The mother should not have been discharged from the hospital with abnormal findings.
DEFENDANTS’ DEFENSE
The case was settled during trial.
VERDICT
A $1 million New Jersey settlement was reached, of which $100,000 was provided to the mother.

Related Article: A stepwise approach to managing eclampsia and other hypertensive emergencies Baha M. Sibai, MD (October 2013)

EXCESSIVE FORCE BLAMED FOR ERB’S PALSY
Shoulder dystocia was encountered during delivery.
The child suffered a brachial plexus injury with Erb’s palsy. She received botulinum toxin injections and underwent nerve-graft surgery to restore some function. She has limited use of her right arm and a protruding right elbow.
PARENTS’ CLAIM
The ObGyn used excessive force in response to shoulder dystocia.
PHYSICIAN’S DEFENSE
The case was settled at trial.
VERDICT
A $1 million New Jersey settlement was placed in a structured payment fund to provide a net $1.78 million over the child’s lifetime. 

Related Article: You are the second responder to a shoulder dystocia emergency. What do you do first? Robert L. Barbieri, MD (Editorial, May 2013)

WAS WOMAN UNLAWFULLY SEEKING DRUGS?
A 30-year-old woman went to an ED
with pelvic pain and vaginal discharge. An ED physician conducted a physical exam. Blood tests indicated the patient had taken barbiturates, but the patient could not explain the findings. Determining no cause for her symptoms, the ED physician discharged the patient.
Just after she left, the ED physician found that the patient had several narcotics prescriptions and called the police. The patient was arrested and charged with unlawfully seeking drugs at the hospital. Criminal charges were later dismissed.
PATIENT’S CLAIM
The ED physician did not properly examine her; she was found to have endometriosis and underwent surgery a few weeks later. The ED physician was negligent for divulging her personal information to police.
The ED physician had had his physician’s license suspended due to substance abuse and had also been arrested for driving under the influence after his license was restored.
PHYSICIAN’S DEFENSE
The ED physician’s examination and treatment were proper. The phone call to police was not part of treatment. The patient had a malicious prosecution basis for any claims.
VERDICT
A $125,000 Kentucky verdict was returned.

CASCADING PROBLEMS: MOTHER AND BABY DIE
A pregnant woman was admitted to an ED,
where the on-call physician determined that she had pneumonia. The patient’s ObGyn, 45 miles away, refused to come to the hospital or arrange for another ObGyn to take the case.
Several hours later, after the mother was found to have fulminant preeclampsia, the ObGyn demanded the patient be moved to the hospital’s internal medicine (IM) service. However, the IM service refused to admit the patient because she needed obstetric care. The ObGyn tried to transfer the patient to a maternal-fetal medicine (MFM) specialist at a tertiary care center; transfer was refused because the patient was too unstable and needed an emergency cesarean delivery. The ObGyn continued to refuse to relinquish care to another ObGyn.
The ED physician decided to transfer the patient to another hospital 50 miles away even though she was now in active labor. An MFM specialist accepted transfer. After 5 hours in the ED, the mother left by ambulance, but, during transport, she suffered placental abruption and internal hemorrhaging. She was in critical condition upon arrival. An emergency cesarean delivery was performed, but the mother died. The baby, born with severe brain damage, also died.
ESTATES’ CLAIM
The ED physician failed to properly and timely determine that the mother had preeclampsia; no treatment for hypertension was provided. The ED physician withheld critical information, including the patient’s severe hypertension, proteinurea, and edema, when speaking to the MFM specialist who accepted transfer. The ED physician did not evaluate the mother before departure and certified the transfer although the patient was highly unstable.
The ObGyn was negligent in not transferring care to another ObGyn and not coming to the hospital. The ObGyn did not inform the ED physician of the rejected attempt to transfer the patient or of the first MFM specialist’s recommendation for emergency cesarean. Both mother and baby could have survived with proper treatment.
DEFENDANTS’ DEFENSE
The case was settled at trial. 
VERDICT
A $900,000 Michigan settlement was reached.

 

 

FECAL INCONTINENCE AFTER EPISIOTOMY
A 26-year-old woman gave birth
after her ObGyn created an episiotomy to facilitate delivery. The incision was repaired and the ObGyn prescribed docusate (Colace) to soften her stools.
A month later, the patient report-ed fecal incontinence. The ObGyn determined that the incontinence was related to the episiotomy, but did not feel that immediate attention was needed. When the condition did not improve, the patient saw a colorectal surgeon, who diagnosed a significant sphincter defect. The patient underwent a sphincteroplasty, with minor improvement.
PATIENT’S CLAIM
The ObGyn failed to properly manage episiotomy healing. The patient remembers being told to stop docusate after she had passed one stool after delivery. A 10-day regimen of docusate and a diet to reduce defecation frequency should have been prescribed. Incontinence should have prompted an immediate referral to a colorectal surgeon.
PHYSICIAN’S DEFENSE
Prompt surgical intervention was not necessary. Sphincteroplasty can be delayed until conservative methods have been tried. Episiotomy healing was properly addressed. Permanent incontinence is a known risk of the procedure.
VERDICT
A $6 million New York verdict was returned.

Related Article: Does mediolateral episiotomy reduce the risk of anal sphincter injury in operative vaginal delivery? Errol R. Norwitz, MD, PhD (Examining the Evidence, August 2012)

MECONIUM ASPIRATION SYNDROME
A baby stayed in hospital for 3 weeks
postdelivery due to meconium aspiration syndrome.
PARENTS’ CLAIM
The resident who followed the mother during her pregnancy was negligent in allowing the pregnancy to progress to 46 weeks’ gestation before delivery.
DEFENDANTS’ DEFENSE
The estimated date of conception was disputed. The resident claimed that the baby was born at 42 weeks’ gestation. An attending physician reviewed all prenatal visits with the resident. The mother’s cervix was never ripe before induction of labor. Aspiration occurred despite aggressive suctioning. The child has had no further respiratory issues since her neonatal discharge.
VERDICT
An Illinois defense verdict was returned.  

BOWEL INJURY AFTER HYSTERECTOMY
A woman underwent laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy
and was discharged the following day. Two days later, she went to an ED in acute distress. A bowel perforation was found during emergency surgery, and her colon was repaired. She made a full recovery.
PATIENT’S CLAIM
The ObGyn was negligent in failing to properly evaluate the patient after surgery. The ObGyn also failed to explain the signs of a possible perforation to the patient before she left the hospital.
PHYSICIAN’S DEFENSE The patient’s postoperative course was normal while she was hospitalized. Bowel perforation is a known complication of the procedure. The patient had been informed of all the signs and symptoms of a bowel perforation and had been instructed to call the ObGyn or return to the hospital if she began to have any symptoms.
VERDICT
A South Carolina defense verdict was returned.

These cases were selected by the editors of OBG Management from Medical Malpractice Verdicts, Settlements & Experts, with permission of the editor, Lewis Laska (www.verdictslaska.com). The information available to the editors about the cases presented here is sometimes incomplete. Moreover, the cases may or may not have merit. Nevertheless, these cases represent the types of clinical situations that typically result in litigation and are meant to illustrate nationwide variation in jury verdicts and awards.

WE WANT TO HEAR FROM YOU!
Drop us a line and let us know what you think about current articles, which topics you'd like to see covered in future issues, and what challenges you face in daily practice. Tell us what you think by emailing us at: [email protected]

CIRCUMCISION ACCIDENT: $1.3M VERDICT
A newborn underwent circumcision
when 12 hours old. The ObGyn removed adhesions present between the foreskin and glans. After locking the Mogen clamp, the ObGyn amputated a 9-mm by 8-mm portion of the top of the penis along with the foreskin. The newborn was rushed to a children’s hospital where a pediatric urologist surgically reattached the amputated glans. The child’s penis is not cosmetically normal, with permanent scars and disfigurement. He has altered nerve sensation at and above the area of the amputation.
PARENTS’ CLAIM
The ObGyn improperly performed the circumcision. He failed to remove a sufficient amount of adhesions, pulled too much into the clamp, and amputated 30% of the distal portion of the glans.
PHYSICIAN’S DEFENSE
The ObGyn circumcised this child the same way he had performed more than 1,000 circumcisions. Multiple dense adhesions between the glans and foreskin caused the top of the penis to be inadvertently pulled through the clamp. Amputation is a known risk of the procedure.
VERDICT
A $1,357,901 Illinois verdict was returned.

WHAT CAUSED CHILD’S KIDNEY DISEASE?
At 36 weeks’ gestation,
a mother came to the emergency department (ED) with abdominal pain. She had proteinuria, elevated liver enzymes, and a low-normal platelet count. An ObGyn determined that the fetus was normal, and discharged her.
The patient returned 2 days later with internal bleeding and placental abruption. She was diagnosed with hemolysis, elevated liver enzymes, and low platelet count (HELLP syndrome). The child, born by cesarean delivery, had kidney failure that caused growth retardation. The child has received a kidney transplant.
PARENTS’ CLAIM The mother should not have been discharged from the hospital with abnormal findings.
DEFENDANTS’ DEFENSE
The case was settled during trial.
VERDICT
A $1 million New Jersey settlement was reached, of which $100,000 was provided to the mother.

Related Article: A stepwise approach to managing eclampsia and other hypertensive emergencies Baha M. Sibai, MD (October 2013)

EXCESSIVE FORCE BLAMED FOR ERB’S PALSY
Shoulder dystocia was encountered during delivery.
The child suffered a brachial plexus injury with Erb’s palsy. She received botulinum toxin injections and underwent nerve-graft surgery to restore some function. She has limited use of her right arm and a protruding right elbow.
PARENTS’ CLAIM
The ObGyn used excessive force in response to shoulder dystocia.
PHYSICIAN’S DEFENSE
The case was settled at trial.
VERDICT
A $1 million New Jersey settlement was placed in a structured payment fund to provide a net $1.78 million over the child’s lifetime. 

Related Article: You are the second responder to a shoulder dystocia emergency. What do you do first? Robert L. Barbieri, MD (Editorial, May 2013)

WAS WOMAN UNLAWFULLY SEEKING DRUGS?
A 30-year-old woman went to an ED
with pelvic pain and vaginal discharge. An ED physician conducted a physical exam. Blood tests indicated the patient had taken barbiturates, but the patient could not explain the findings. Determining no cause for her symptoms, the ED physician discharged the patient.
Just after she left, the ED physician found that the patient had several narcotics prescriptions and called the police. The patient was arrested and charged with unlawfully seeking drugs at the hospital. Criminal charges were later dismissed.
PATIENT’S CLAIM
The ED physician did not properly examine her; she was found to have endometriosis and underwent surgery a few weeks later. The ED physician was negligent for divulging her personal information to police.
The ED physician had had his physician’s license suspended due to substance abuse and had also been arrested for driving under the influence after his license was restored.
PHYSICIAN’S DEFENSE
The ED physician’s examination and treatment were proper. The phone call to police was not part of treatment. The patient had a malicious prosecution basis for any claims.
VERDICT
A $125,000 Kentucky verdict was returned.

CASCADING PROBLEMS: MOTHER AND BABY DIE
A pregnant woman was admitted to an ED,
where the on-call physician determined that she had pneumonia. The patient’s ObGyn, 45 miles away, refused to come to the hospital or arrange for another ObGyn to take the case.
Several hours later, after the mother was found to have fulminant preeclampsia, the ObGyn demanded the patient be moved to the hospital’s internal medicine (IM) service. However, the IM service refused to admit the patient because she needed obstetric care. The ObGyn tried to transfer the patient to a maternal-fetal medicine (MFM) specialist at a tertiary care center; transfer was refused because the patient was too unstable and needed an emergency cesarean delivery. The ObGyn continued to refuse to relinquish care to another ObGyn.
The ED physician decided to transfer the patient to another hospital 50 miles away even though she was now in active labor. An MFM specialist accepted transfer. After 5 hours in the ED, the mother left by ambulance, but, during transport, she suffered placental abruption and internal hemorrhaging. She was in critical condition upon arrival. An emergency cesarean delivery was performed, but the mother died. The baby, born with severe brain damage, also died.
ESTATES’ CLAIM
The ED physician failed to properly and timely determine that the mother had preeclampsia; no treatment for hypertension was provided. The ED physician withheld critical information, including the patient’s severe hypertension, proteinurea, and edema, when speaking to the MFM specialist who accepted transfer. The ED physician did not evaluate the mother before departure and certified the transfer although the patient was highly unstable.
The ObGyn was negligent in not transferring care to another ObGyn and not coming to the hospital. The ObGyn did not inform the ED physician of the rejected attempt to transfer the patient or of the first MFM specialist’s recommendation for emergency cesarean. Both mother and baby could have survived with proper treatment.
DEFENDANTS’ DEFENSE
The case was settled at trial. 
VERDICT
A $900,000 Michigan settlement was reached.

 

 

FECAL INCONTINENCE AFTER EPISIOTOMY
A 26-year-old woman gave birth
after her ObGyn created an episiotomy to facilitate delivery. The incision was repaired and the ObGyn prescribed docusate (Colace) to soften her stools.
A month later, the patient report-ed fecal incontinence. The ObGyn determined that the incontinence was related to the episiotomy, but did not feel that immediate attention was needed. When the condition did not improve, the patient saw a colorectal surgeon, who diagnosed a significant sphincter defect. The patient underwent a sphincteroplasty, with minor improvement.
PATIENT’S CLAIM
The ObGyn failed to properly manage episiotomy healing. The patient remembers being told to stop docusate after she had passed one stool after delivery. A 10-day regimen of docusate and a diet to reduce defecation frequency should have been prescribed. Incontinence should have prompted an immediate referral to a colorectal surgeon.
PHYSICIAN’S DEFENSE
Prompt surgical intervention was not necessary. Sphincteroplasty can be delayed until conservative methods have been tried. Episiotomy healing was properly addressed. Permanent incontinence is a known risk of the procedure.
VERDICT
A $6 million New York verdict was returned.

Related Article: Does mediolateral episiotomy reduce the risk of anal sphincter injury in operative vaginal delivery? Errol R. Norwitz, MD, PhD (Examining the Evidence, August 2012)

MECONIUM ASPIRATION SYNDROME
A baby stayed in hospital for 3 weeks
postdelivery due to meconium aspiration syndrome.
PARENTS’ CLAIM
The resident who followed the mother during her pregnancy was negligent in allowing the pregnancy to progress to 46 weeks’ gestation before delivery.
DEFENDANTS’ DEFENSE
The estimated date of conception was disputed. The resident claimed that the baby was born at 42 weeks’ gestation. An attending physician reviewed all prenatal visits with the resident. The mother’s cervix was never ripe before induction of labor. Aspiration occurred despite aggressive suctioning. The child has had no further respiratory issues since her neonatal discharge.
VERDICT
An Illinois defense verdict was returned.  

BOWEL INJURY AFTER HYSTERECTOMY
A woman underwent laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy
and was discharged the following day. Two days later, she went to an ED in acute distress. A bowel perforation was found during emergency surgery, and her colon was repaired. She made a full recovery.
PATIENT’S CLAIM
The ObGyn was negligent in failing to properly evaluate the patient after surgery. The ObGyn also failed to explain the signs of a possible perforation to the patient before she left the hospital.
PHYSICIAN’S DEFENSE The patient’s postoperative course was normal while she was hospitalized. Bowel perforation is a known complication of the procedure. The patient had been informed of all the signs and symptoms of a bowel perforation and had been instructed to call the ObGyn or return to the hospital if she began to have any symptoms.
VERDICT
A South Carolina defense verdict was returned.

These cases were selected by the editors of OBG Management from Medical Malpractice Verdicts, Settlements & Experts, with permission of the editor, Lewis Laska (www.verdictslaska.com). The information available to the editors about the cases presented here is sometimes incomplete. Moreover, the cases may or may not have merit. Nevertheless, these cases represent the types of clinical situations that typically result in litigation and are meant to illustrate nationwide variation in jury verdicts and awards.

WE WANT TO HEAR FROM YOU!
Drop us a line and let us know what you think about current articles, which topics you'd like to see covered in future issues, and what challenges you face in daily practice. Tell us what you think by emailing us at: [email protected]

Issue
OBG Management - 26(2)
Issue
OBG Management - 26(2)
Page Number
66-67
Page Number
66-67
Publications
Publications
Article Type
Display Headline
Circumcision accident: $1.3M verdict
Display Headline
Circumcision accident: $1.3M verdict
Legacy Keywords
medical verdicts,medical malpractice,circumcision accident,kidney disease,HELLP syndrome,hemolysis,elevated liver enzymes,low platelet count,Erb's palsy,shoulder dystocia,pelvic pain,endometriosis,unlawfully seeking drugs,fulminant preeclampsia,emergency cesarean,fecal incontinence,episiotomy,docusate,meconium aspiration syndrome,hysterectomy,bowel injury,Medical Malpractice Verdicts Settlements & Experts,Lewis Laska
Legacy Keywords
medical verdicts,medical malpractice,circumcision accident,kidney disease,HELLP syndrome,hemolysis,elevated liver enzymes,low platelet count,Erb's palsy,shoulder dystocia,pelvic pain,endometriosis,unlawfully seeking drugs,fulminant preeclampsia,emergency cesarean,fecal incontinence,episiotomy,docusate,meconium aspiration syndrome,hysterectomy,bowel injury,Medical Malpractice Verdicts Settlements & Experts,Lewis Laska
Sections
Article Source

PURLs Copyright

Inside the Article

Article PDF Media

Mutation could be target for MDS/AML treatment

Article Type
Changed
Sat, 01/25/2014 - 06:00
Display Headline
Mutation could be target for MDS/AML treatment

Osteoblasts

Scientists have found evidence to suggest that a genetic alteration in osteoblasts can induce acute myeloid leukemia (AML).

And this provides a potential therapeutic target for AML and myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS).

Stavroula Kousteni, PhD, of Columbia University Medical Center in New York, and her colleagues described these findings in Nature.

The researchers discovered that an activating mutation of beta-catenin in mouse osteoblasts induces AML.

This mutation leads to cancer in adjacent hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs) through a series of events. First, the mutated beta-catenin protein moves from its normal location on the exterior of the osteoblast to the cell’s nucleus, where it activates production of the protein jagged1.

Jagged1 proteins are then shipped to the osteoblast’s exterior membrane, where they can bind to Notch proteins—which activate signaling pathways—on neighboring HSCs. When this happens, Notch transmits signals inside the HSCs that enable leukemic transformation.

To confirm the role of jagged1 in AML development, the investigators removed 1 allele of jagged1 in osteoblasts. This decreased Notch signaling in Lin-Sca+c-Kit+ cells, rescued anemia and deregulation of HSC lineage differentiation, and prevented AML development.

The researchers then evaluated the effects of blocking Notch signaling using a gamma-secretase inhibitor. The treatment reversed hematopoietic deregulation and myeloid expansion in the blood, marrow, and spleens of the mice and reversed their AML.

“If the [process] works the same way in humans, our study suggests practical ways that we may be able to intervene with a drug or an antibody,” Dr Kousteni said.

With this in mind, she and her colleagues analyzed cells from 107 patients with AML or MDS. About 38% of the patients had changes in beta-catenin, jagged1, and Notch signaling that mirrored the changes in the mice. But none of the 56 healthy control subjects studied had these changes.

The investigators therefore concluded that these findings provide new insight into AML/MDS pathogenesis and may have implications for treatment.

Publications
Topics

Osteoblasts

Scientists have found evidence to suggest that a genetic alteration in osteoblasts can induce acute myeloid leukemia (AML).

And this provides a potential therapeutic target for AML and myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS).

Stavroula Kousteni, PhD, of Columbia University Medical Center in New York, and her colleagues described these findings in Nature.

The researchers discovered that an activating mutation of beta-catenin in mouse osteoblasts induces AML.

This mutation leads to cancer in adjacent hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs) through a series of events. First, the mutated beta-catenin protein moves from its normal location on the exterior of the osteoblast to the cell’s nucleus, where it activates production of the protein jagged1.

Jagged1 proteins are then shipped to the osteoblast’s exterior membrane, where they can bind to Notch proteins—which activate signaling pathways—on neighboring HSCs. When this happens, Notch transmits signals inside the HSCs that enable leukemic transformation.

To confirm the role of jagged1 in AML development, the investigators removed 1 allele of jagged1 in osteoblasts. This decreased Notch signaling in Lin-Sca+c-Kit+ cells, rescued anemia and deregulation of HSC lineage differentiation, and prevented AML development.

The researchers then evaluated the effects of blocking Notch signaling using a gamma-secretase inhibitor. The treatment reversed hematopoietic deregulation and myeloid expansion in the blood, marrow, and spleens of the mice and reversed their AML.

“If the [process] works the same way in humans, our study suggests practical ways that we may be able to intervene with a drug or an antibody,” Dr Kousteni said.

With this in mind, she and her colleagues analyzed cells from 107 patients with AML or MDS. About 38% of the patients had changes in beta-catenin, jagged1, and Notch signaling that mirrored the changes in the mice. But none of the 56 healthy control subjects studied had these changes.

The investigators therefore concluded that these findings provide new insight into AML/MDS pathogenesis and may have implications for treatment.

Osteoblasts

Scientists have found evidence to suggest that a genetic alteration in osteoblasts can induce acute myeloid leukemia (AML).

And this provides a potential therapeutic target for AML and myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS).

Stavroula Kousteni, PhD, of Columbia University Medical Center in New York, and her colleagues described these findings in Nature.

The researchers discovered that an activating mutation of beta-catenin in mouse osteoblasts induces AML.

This mutation leads to cancer in adjacent hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs) through a series of events. First, the mutated beta-catenin protein moves from its normal location on the exterior of the osteoblast to the cell’s nucleus, where it activates production of the protein jagged1.

Jagged1 proteins are then shipped to the osteoblast’s exterior membrane, where they can bind to Notch proteins—which activate signaling pathways—on neighboring HSCs. When this happens, Notch transmits signals inside the HSCs that enable leukemic transformation.

To confirm the role of jagged1 in AML development, the investigators removed 1 allele of jagged1 in osteoblasts. This decreased Notch signaling in Lin-Sca+c-Kit+ cells, rescued anemia and deregulation of HSC lineage differentiation, and prevented AML development.

The researchers then evaluated the effects of blocking Notch signaling using a gamma-secretase inhibitor. The treatment reversed hematopoietic deregulation and myeloid expansion in the blood, marrow, and spleens of the mice and reversed their AML.

“If the [process] works the same way in humans, our study suggests practical ways that we may be able to intervene with a drug or an antibody,” Dr Kousteni said.

With this in mind, she and her colleagues analyzed cells from 107 patients with AML or MDS. About 38% of the patients had changes in beta-catenin, jagged1, and Notch signaling that mirrored the changes in the mice. But none of the 56 healthy control subjects studied had these changes.

The investigators therefore concluded that these findings provide new insight into AML/MDS pathogenesis and may have implications for treatment.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Mutation could be target for MDS/AML treatment
Display Headline
Mutation could be target for MDS/AML treatment
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica

Sickle cell trait affects need for ESAs

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 01/24/2014 - 06:00
Display Headline
Sickle cell trait affects need for ESAs

red blood cells

Red blood cells

Researchers may have discovered why African Americans on dialysis sometimes require higher doses of erythropoietin-stimulating agents (ESAs) than dialysis patients of other ethnicities.

The team found that sickle cell trait was more common in African Americans on dialysis than in the general African American population.

And patients with sickle cell trait required higher ESA doses than other African American dialysis patients to reach the same hemoglobin level.

The researchers reported these findings in the Journal of the American Society of Nephrology.

The team noted that kidney abnormalities have been reported in some individuals with sickle cell trait. And studies have shown that African Americans with kidney failure require higher doses of ESAs to treat anemia during dialysis. So researchers wondered if there was a correlation.

To find out, Vimal Derebail, MD, of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and his colleagues examined laboratory and clinical data concerning 5319 adult African American hemodialysis patients.

But the researchers looked at the presence of hemoglobin C trait as well as sickle cell trait.

In the entire study cohort, 542 (10.2%) patients had sickle cell trait, and 129 (2.4%) had hemoglobin C trait. There were no other hemoglobinopathy traits present.

Sickle cell trait was more common among dialysis patients than the general African American population—10.2% and 6.5%-8.7%, respectively (P<0.05).

Among the 5002 patients receiving ESAs, 10.3% had sickle cell trait and 2.4% had hemoglobin C trait.

The patients with hemoglobinopathy traits received higher median ESA doses than patients with normal traits—4737.4 units/treatment and 4364.1 units/treatment, respectively (P=0.02).

Having either hemoglobinopathy trait was associated with a 13.2% increase in ESA dose (P=0.001). And patients with either trait had a 30% increased risk of falling into the highest quartile of ESA dosing.

There was no significant difference in the dose increase according to trait type (P=0.10).

The researchers therefore said these findings suggest the presence of hemoglobinopathy traits, particularly sickle cell trait, may explain why greater ESA doses are administered to African American dialysis patients relative to Caucasian patients.

“While we don’t know whether there are any adverse consequences to this higher dose of medication yet, further policies and decisions regarding management of anemia in dialysis patients should take into account these findings,” Dr Derebail said.

He added that future research should also explore whether sickle cell trait is more common in dialysis patients because it contributes to kidney disease.

Publications
Topics

red blood cells

Red blood cells

Researchers may have discovered why African Americans on dialysis sometimes require higher doses of erythropoietin-stimulating agents (ESAs) than dialysis patients of other ethnicities.

The team found that sickle cell trait was more common in African Americans on dialysis than in the general African American population.

And patients with sickle cell trait required higher ESA doses than other African American dialysis patients to reach the same hemoglobin level.

The researchers reported these findings in the Journal of the American Society of Nephrology.

The team noted that kidney abnormalities have been reported in some individuals with sickle cell trait. And studies have shown that African Americans with kidney failure require higher doses of ESAs to treat anemia during dialysis. So researchers wondered if there was a correlation.

To find out, Vimal Derebail, MD, of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and his colleagues examined laboratory and clinical data concerning 5319 adult African American hemodialysis patients.

But the researchers looked at the presence of hemoglobin C trait as well as sickle cell trait.

In the entire study cohort, 542 (10.2%) patients had sickle cell trait, and 129 (2.4%) had hemoglobin C trait. There were no other hemoglobinopathy traits present.

Sickle cell trait was more common among dialysis patients than the general African American population—10.2% and 6.5%-8.7%, respectively (P<0.05).

Among the 5002 patients receiving ESAs, 10.3% had sickle cell trait and 2.4% had hemoglobin C trait.

The patients with hemoglobinopathy traits received higher median ESA doses than patients with normal traits—4737.4 units/treatment and 4364.1 units/treatment, respectively (P=0.02).

Having either hemoglobinopathy trait was associated with a 13.2% increase in ESA dose (P=0.001). And patients with either trait had a 30% increased risk of falling into the highest quartile of ESA dosing.

There was no significant difference in the dose increase according to trait type (P=0.10).

The researchers therefore said these findings suggest the presence of hemoglobinopathy traits, particularly sickle cell trait, may explain why greater ESA doses are administered to African American dialysis patients relative to Caucasian patients.

“While we don’t know whether there are any adverse consequences to this higher dose of medication yet, further policies and decisions regarding management of anemia in dialysis patients should take into account these findings,” Dr Derebail said.

He added that future research should also explore whether sickle cell trait is more common in dialysis patients because it contributes to kidney disease.

red blood cells

Red blood cells

Researchers may have discovered why African Americans on dialysis sometimes require higher doses of erythropoietin-stimulating agents (ESAs) than dialysis patients of other ethnicities.

The team found that sickle cell trait was more common in African Americans on dialysis than in the general African American population.

And patients with sickle cell trait required higher ESA doses than other African American dialysis patients to reach the same hemoglobin level.

The researchers reported these findings in the Journal of the American Society of Nephrology.

The team noted that kidney abnormalities have been reported in some individuals with sickle cell trait. And studies have shown that African Americans with kidney failure require higher doses of ESAs to treat anemia during dialysis. So researchers wondered if there was a correlation.

To find out, Vimal Derebail, MD, of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and his colleagues examined laboratory and clinical data concerning 5319 adult African American hemodialysis patients.

But the researchers looked at the presence of hemoglobin C trait as well as sickle cell trait.

In the entire study cohort, 542 (10.2%) patients had sickle cell trait, and 129 (2.4%) had hemoglobin C trait. There were no other hemoglobinopathy traits present.

Sickle cell trait was more common among dialysis patients than the general African American population—10.2% and 6.5%-8.7%, respectively (P<0.05).

Among the 5002 patients receiving ESAs, 10.3% had sickle cell trait and 2.4% had hemoglobin C trait.

The patients with hemoglobinopathy traits received higher median ESA doses than patients with normal traits—4737.4 units/treatment and 4364.1 units/treatment, respectively (P=0.02).

Having either hemoglobinopathy trait was associated with a 13.2% increase in ESA dose (P=0.001). And patients with either trait had a 30% increased risk of falling into the highest quartile of ESA dosing.

There was no significant difference in the dose increase according to trait type (P=0.10).

The researchers therefore said these findings suggest the presence of hemoglobinopathy traits, particularly sickle cell trait, may explain why greater ESA doses are administered to African American dialysis patients relative to Caucasian patients.

“While we don’t know whether there are any adverse consequences to this higher dose of medication yet, further policies and decisions regarding management of anemia in dialysis patients should take into account these findings,” Dr Derebail said.

He added that future research should also explore whether sickle cell trait is more common in dialysis patients because it contributes to kidney disease.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Sickle cell trait affects need for ESAs
Display Headline
Sickle cell trait affects need for ESAs
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica

High-volume centers better for severe sepsis patients

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 01/24/2014 - 06:00
Display Headline
High-volume centers better for severe sepsis patients

Doctor and patient

Credit: CDC

A new study suggests that “practice makes perfect” when it comes to caring for patients with severe sepsis.

Researchers found that patients admitted to academic medical centers with a higher volume of severe sepsis patients had significantly lower mortality rates than patients treated at centers with lower volumes of sepsis patients.

And the superior outcomes did not come at a greater cost.

Allan J. Walkey, MD, of the Boston University School of Medicine in Massachusetts, and his colleagues reported these findings in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine.

The researchers noted that processes of care can influence outcomes in patients with severe sepsis. However, it hasn’t been clear whether a hospital’s level of experience in caring for patients with severe sepsis affects patient outcomes.

So Dr Walkey and his colleagues conducted a large, retrospective study to find out. The team analyzed data from academic hospitals across the US, provided by the University HealthSystem Consortium.

They identified 56,997 patients with severe sepsis who were admitted to 124 academic medical centers in 2011.

The patients’ median length of stay was 12.5 days, the median direct cost for each patient was $26,304, and the average hospital mortality was 25.6 ± 5.3%.

Hospitals caring for more sepsis patients had a 7% lower mortality rate than hospitals with lower volumes.

The high-volume medical centers (604-977 cases) had a 22.2% adjusted mortality rate, and the lower-volume hospitals (30-317) had a 29.2% adjusted mortality rate (P<0.01).

There was no significant difference in direct costs between the low-volume and high-volume centers (P=0.79).

“Given the lack of new drugs to treat severe sepsis, medical professionals must look at other ways to increase patient safety and positive outcomes, including the process of how we deliver care,” Dr Walkey said.

“Our study results demonstrate that hospitals with more experience caring for patients with severe sepsis were able to achieve better outcomes than hospitals with less experience with sepsis, possibly due to better processes of care for patients with sepsis.”

Publications
Topics

Doctor and patient

Credit: CDC

A new study suggests that “practice makes perfect” when it comes to caring for patients with severe sepsis.

Researchers found that patients admitted to academic medical centers with a higher volume of severe sepsis patients had significantly lower mortality rates than patients treated at centers with lower volumes of sepsis patients.

And the superior outcomes did not come at a greater cost.

Allan J. Walkey, MD, of the Boston University School of Medicine in Massachusetts, and his colleagues reported these findings in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine.

The researchers noted that processes of care can influence outcomes in patients with severe sepsis. However, it hasn’t been clear whether a hospital’s level of experience in caring for patients with severe sepsis affects patient outcomes.

So Dr Walkey and his colleagues conducted a large, retrospective study to find out. The team analyzed data from academic hospitals across the US, provided by the University HealthSystem Consortium.

They identified 56,997 patients with severe sepsis who were admitted to 124 academic medical centers in 2011.

The patients’ median length of stay was 12.5 days, the median direct cost for each patient was $26,304, and the average hospital mortality was 25.6 ± 5.3%.

Hospitals caring for more sepsis patients had a 7% lower mortality rate than hospitals with lower volumes.

The high-volume medical centers (604-977 cases) had a 22.2% adjusted mortality rate, and the lower-volume hospitals (30-317) had a 29.2% adjusted mortality rate (P<0.01).

There was no significant difference in direct costs between the low-volume and high-volume centers (P=0.79).

“Given the lack of new drugs to treat severe sepsis, medical professionals must look at other ways to increase patient safety and positive outcomes, including the process of how we deliver care,” Dr Walkey said.

“Our study results demonstrate that hospitals with more experience caring for patients with severe sepsis were able to achieve better outcomes than hospitals with less experience with sepsis, possibly due to better processes of care for patients with sepsis.”

Doctor and patient

Credit: CDC

A new study suggests that “practice makes perfect” when it comes to caring for patients with severe sepsis.

Researchers found that patients admitted to academic medical centers with a higher volume of severe sepsis patients had significantly lower mortality rates than patients treated at centers with lower volumes of sepsis patients.

And the superior outcomes did not come at a greater cost.

Allan J. Walkey, MD, of the Boston University School of Medicine in Massachusetts, and his colleagues reported these findings in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine.

The researchers noted that processes of care can influence outcomes in patients with severe sepsis. However, it hasn’t been clear whether a hospital’s level of experience in caring for patients with severe sepsis affects patient outcomes.

So Dr Walkey and his colleagues conducted a large, retrospective study to find out. The team analyzed data from academic hospitals across the US, provided by the University HealthSystem Consortium.

They identified 56,997 patients with severe sepsis who were admitted to 124 academic medical centers in 2011.

The patients’ median length of stay was 12.5 days, the median direct cost for each patient was $26,304, and the average hospital mortality was 25.6 ± 5.3%.

Hospitals caring for more sepsis patients had a 7% lower mortality rate than hospitals with lower volumes.

The high-volume medical centers (604-977 cases) had a 22.2% adjusted mortality rate, and the lower-volume hospitals (30-317) had a 29.2% adjusted mortality rate (P<0.01).

There was no significant difference in direct costs between the low-volume and high-volume centers (P=0.79).

“Given the lack of new drugs to treat severe sepsis, medical professionals must look at other ways to increase patient safety and positive outcomes, including the process of how we deliver care,” Dr Walkey said.

“Our study results demonstrate that hospitals with more experience caring for patients with severe sepsis were able to achieve better outcomes than hospitals with less experience with sepsis, possibly due to better processes of care for patients with sepsis.”

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
High-volume centers better for severe sepsis patients
Display Headline
High-volume centers better for severe sepsis patients
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica

Outcomes of ESBL‐EK UTI

Article Type
Changed
Sun, 05/21/2017 - 14:28
Display Headline
Impact of extended‐spectrum β‐lactamase–producing organisms on clinical and economic outcomes in patients with urinary tract infection

Community‐onset urinary tract infection (UTI) is a common bacterial infection encountered in hospital medicine, accounting for >350,000 hospital admissions and $3.4 billion in healthcare costs annually.[1] High proportions of these infections are caused by Enterobacteriaceae, primarily Escherichia coli and Klebsiella species.[2] The prevalence of hospitalized patients with UTI caused by multidrug‐resistant E coli and Klebsiella species has increased.[3, 4, 5] Enterobacteriaceae can produce hydrolytic enzymes, specifically extended‐spectrum ‐lactamases (ESBL), which result in high rates of bacterial resistance to frequently used agents.[6] Global rates vary widely by region, and recent surveillance data showed increasing rates of clinical isolates in North America are ESBL producers.[7, 8, 9, 10] More alarming is the emergence of these resistant organisms in the community.[11]

In addition to ‐lactams, ESBL production is associated with resistance to other antibiotic classes (fluoroquinolones, aminoglycosides, and sulfonamides), and has become an important cause of failed therapy.[12, 13] Consequently, providing adequate and timely antibiotics can become convoluted due to fewer remaining treatment options. Therefore, carbapenems, which are less susceptible to hydrolysis by these enzymes, have become the preferred therapy for infection with ESBL‐producing pathogens.[3, 13, 14]

The consequences of ESBL production, mainly in bloodstream infection (BSI), are well characterized, including notable delays in receipt of appropriate antibiotic therapy, prolonged length of stay (LOS), and increased cost of care.[15, 16] Importantly, others have found higher rates of mortality.[17, 18, 19, 20, 21] However, the impact on outcomes specifically in UTI remains unclear. As a result of the prevalence of UTI admissions to the hospital, the increasing incidence of ESBLs, and the potential impact on the clinical course of care, additional study is required to support best practices for this common diagnosis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Study Subjects and Design

This was a retrospective, matched‐cohort analysis of patients admitted to the hospital with UTI (International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision‐Clinical Modification code 599.0) caused by extended‐spectrum b‐lactamase‐producing Escherichia coli and Klebsiella species (ESBL‐EK). Patients admitted to Hartford Hospital from September 1, 2011 through August 31, 2012 with UTI present on admission (48 hours) were evaluated. Cases were patients 18 years of age, with a positive urine culture (104 CFU/mL) for an ESBL‐producing organism (48 hours of admission), who received antibiotic treatment directed at the positive culture for 48 hours, and beginning prior to availability of in vitro susceptibility results. Cases were identified by a detailed search of the microbiology department database of ESBL‐EK cultures. Only the first positive (index) culture for each patient was included. Bacteremia was defined as isolation of a blood culture organism identical to the one isolated from the urine culture. Patients were excluded if they were discharged, died, or placed on palliative care prior to or on the date of urine collection. Controls (patients admitted with UTI on admission caused by nonESBL‐EK) were matched to cases in a 1:1 fashion on the basis of isolated urinary pathogen, age (5 years), sex, and race. ESBL‐producing organisms were identified and classified according to the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute guidelines.[22]

Data Collection

Once patients were identified, the following information was collected from the patient's medical record by 2 investigators using a standardized case report form: demographic characteristics, comorbid conditions and severity of comorbidities using the Charlson comorbidity index, recent patient medical history, and clinical and economic attributes.[23]

The study was approved by the institutional review board of Hartford Hospital. An informed consent waiver was granted as all data were currently in existence and no patient‐specific interventions were conducted for the study. The collection of data was in compliance with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996.

Outcomes and Definitions

Onset of UTI was defined as the date/time of the index culture collection. An initial antibiotic treatment was a course of therapy initiated empirically (prior to availability of in vitro susceptibility) and that continued for 48 hours. An appropriate empiric antibiotic was defined as an initial antibiotic that ultimately possessed in vitro activity against the isolated pathogen.

The primary clinical outcomes were initial antibiotic response and clinical response. Initial antibiotic response was defined as failure if there was lack of clinical improvement, as evident by a switch to an alternative antibiotic (excluding switches to similar/narrower‐spectrum agents and courses begun at discharge) or infection‐related mortality while receiving the initial antibiotic. Patients were deemed clinical success if they were clinically stable at discharge or end of therapy, whichever occurred first, with resolution of signs and symptoms of infection. Clinical failures were patients with (1) infection‐related mortality or (2) readmission to hospital with UTI within 30 days of discharge. Clinical response was chosen as a primary outcome because significant mortality attributed to UTI was not anticipated. Secondary clinical outcomes included: time to appropriate antibiotic therapy, mortality (all cause and infection related), and 30‐day readmission (all cause and UTI related). Patients were considered to have received appropriate antibiotic therapy when they had received their first dose of antibiotic with activity against the isolated pathogen based on the patient‐specific in vitro susceptibility results. Time to appropriate antibiotics was defined as the elapsed time (hours) between the index culture collection and the initial dose of appropriate antibiotic therapy. All‐cause mortality was defined as any cause of death at the end of hospitalization, whereas infection‐related mortality was defined as death occurring while receiving antibiotics for the index infection, without any other obvious cause of death.

The primary economic outcomes were hospital LOS, costs, and reimbursement. Antibiotic costs were calculated for each patient according to acquisition costs. Additional economic outcomes evaluated were net hospital reimbursement and primary payor. Net hospital reimbursement was calculated as the difference between hospital reimbursement and hospital costs for each patient. Hospital costs were calculated as the direct plus indirect hospitalization costs for each patient, as determined by our institutional accounting department. All economic values were reported in United States dollars.

Statistical Analysis

Statistical comparisons were performed between cases and controls using a paired t test or Wilcoxon signed rank test for continuous variables, where appropriate. Dichotomous variables were compared using the McNemar test. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to calculate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to determine independent risk factors for ESBL‐EK, including all pertinent variables with a P value <0.1 in univariate analyses. All data were analyzed using SigmaStat version 2.03 (IBM/SPSS, Armonk, NY). A P value of 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Patient Population

Between September 2011 and August 2012, there were 220 specimens of ESBL‐related infection and 2345 patients admitted with a UTI on admission. Eighty‐four were confirmed ESBL‐EK cases (3.6%), and 55 met criteria for inclusion. Twenty‐nine of these cases were excluded because the index culture was polymicrobial, for which the response to antibiotics for ESBL‐EK could not be elicited (n=22); they had incomplete medical records (n=4); or they did not have a matched control patient (n=3). Fifty‐five matched control patients were identified, resulting in 110 patients overall.

Patient demographics and baseline characteristics are shown in Table 1. Patients with ESBL‐EK UTI were more likely to have diabetes mellitus, chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder, and a history of recurrent UTIs. They were more likely to have recently received antibiotics, been hospitalized, or had isolation of an ESBL‐producing organism. No significant differences in Charlson comorbidity index, recent immunosuppressive therapy, or urinary catheterization were observed. Compared with controls, patients with ESBL‐EK UTI were more frequently transferred from another healthcare facility, although the difference was not statistically significant (P=0.06). In the multivariate regression model, diabetes mellitus (OR: 4.4, 95% CI: 1.711.5; P=0.002), history of recurrent UTIs (OR: 4.4, 95% CI: 1.810.9; P=0.001), and transfer from another healthcare facility (OR: 2.38, 95% CI: 1.05.7; P=0.05) were independently associated with ESBL‐EK UTI. Previous isolation of an ESBL‐producing organism (P<0.001) was unable to be included in the multivariate logistic regression model because only patients with UTI caused by ESBL‐EK were positive for this variable. However, as noted in Table 1, 27.2% of cases had isolation of an ESBL‐producing organism in the previous year.

Demographics and Baseline Characteristics of UTI Patients by ESBL Status
 ESBL Positive, n=55ESBL Negative, n=55Pa
  • NOTE: Data are presented as no. (%) of patients unless specified otherwise

  • Abbreviations: COPD, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; ESBL, extended‐spectrum ‐lactamase; HIV/AIDS, human immunodeficiency virus/acquired immunodeficiency syndrome; ICU, intensive care unit; IQR, interquartile range; UTI, urinary tract infection.

  • By McNemar test, unless specified otherwise.

  • By Wilcoxon signed rank test.

  • During the 12 months preceding the index hospitalization.

  • During the 3 months preceding index hospitalization.

  • During the 3 months preceding index hospitalization. Defined as chemotherapy, glucocorticoids (equivalent to prednisone 20 mg for at least 2 weeks), or more than 48 hours of any of the following: tacrolimus, sirolimus, cyclosporine, mycophenolate, or antithymocyte globulin.

  • Defined as 2 infections in 6 months or 3 infections in 1 year.

  • During the 30 days preceding the index hospitalization.

  • During the 12 months preceding the index hospitalization.

Demographics   
Age, y, median (IQR)77 (6785)77 (6685)0.83b
Female36 (65.4)36 (65.4)1.00
White42 (76.4)42 (76.4)1.00
Black5 (9.1)5 (9.1)1.00
Hispanic/Latino6 (10.9)6 (10.9)1.00
Other2 (3.6)2 (3.6)1.00
Comorbidities   
Diabetes mellitus25 (45.5)10 (18.1)0.004
COPD15 (27.2)6 (10.9)0.04
Liver disease2 (3.6)1 (1.8)1.00
Hemodialysis9 (16.4)6 (10.9)0.58
Hematological malignancy3 (5.5)2 (3.6)1.00
Solid malignancy13 (23.6)9 (16.4)0.45
HIV/AIDS01 (1.8)1.00
Age >65 years44 (80.0)43 (78.2)1.00
Urinary abnormality15 (27.2)15 (27.2)1.00
Charlson comorbidity index, median (IQR)3 (24)2 (13.8)0.19
History   
Previous hospitalizationc38 (69.1)24 (43.6)0.01
Previous antibioticsd23 (41.8)12 (21.8)0.04
Recent immunosuppressive therapye9 (16.4)3 (5.5)0.11
History of recurrent UTIsf29 (52.7)12 (21.8)0.001
History of urinary catheterizationg18 (32.7)14 (25.4)0.45
Previous genitourinary procedure/surgery10 (18.2)6 (10.9)0.39
Previous ESBL‐producing organismh15 (27.2)0<0.001
Clinical features   
Transfer from another healthcare facility27 (49.1)17 (21.0)0.06
ICU admission12 (21.8)7 (12.7)0.33
Bacteremia7 (12.7)5 (9.1)0.75
Infectious Diseases consulted39 (70.1)16 (29.1)<0.001
Empiric ‐lactam (noncarbapenem)35 (63.6)50 (90.9)0.001

Isolate Characteristics

The distribution of causative pathogens in each cohort was: 44 (80%) Escherichia coli, 8 (14.5%) Klebsiella pneumoniae, and 3 (5.5%) Klebsiella oxytoca. In vitro nonsusceptibility profiles of the 55 ESBL‐EK cases are characterized in Figure 1. The most active agents were carbapenems, with 98.2% susceptibility to the entire isolate profile, whereas <10% of isolates were susceptible to the fluoroquinolones. All ESBL‐producing isolates were resistant to cefepime.

Figure 1
In vitro nonsusceptibility profiles of the 55 Escherichia coli and Klebsiella species urinary tract infection isolates (E coli [black bars] and Klebsiella species [gray bars]). Abbreviations: CIP, ciprofloxacin; CRO, ceftriaxone; ERT, ertapenem; FEP, cefepime; FOX, cefoxitin; GEN, gentamicin; LVX, levofloxacin; MEM, meropenem; NIT, nitrofurantoin; SAM, ampicillin‐sulbactam; SXT, trimethoprim‐sulfamethoxazole; TET, tetracycline; TOB, tobramycin.

Failure on Initial Antibiotic Regimen

Initial antibiotic therapy is shown in Table 2. A majority of patients (87.2%) were initially treated with a ‐lactam. Empiric carbapenem use was greater in ESBL‐EK cases (18.1% vs 0%; P<0.001), and there were no other significant differences in the distribution of initial antibiotic therapy between cohorts. Less than one‐quarter of ESBL‐EK patients (23.6%) received appropriate initial therapy, whereas 98.2% of controls were initially treated appropriately (P<0.001).

Initial Antibiotics Received by Patients With Urinary Tract Infection According to ESBL Status
Initial AntibioticESBL Positive, n=55ESBL Negative, n=55Pa
  • NOTE: Data are presented as no. (%) of patients. Abbreviations: ESBL, extended‐spectrum ‐lactamase.

  • By McNemar test.

Ceftriaxone21 (38.1)32 (58.1)0.06
Cefepime10 (18.2)12 (21.8)0.81
Ertapenem7 (12.7)00.02
Levofloxacin6 (10.9)4 (7.3)0.74
Cefazolin04 (7.3)0.13
Piperacillin‐tazobactam3 (5.5)00.24
Ciprofloxacin2 (3.6)1 (1.8)1.00
Doripenem2 (3.6)00.48
Trimethoprim‐sulfamethoxazole2 (3.6)00.48
Meropenem1 (1.8)01.00
Cephalexin1 (1.8)01.00
Aztreonam02 (3.6)0.48

Compared with controls, failure of initial antibiotic therapy was more common in patients with ESBL‐EK UTI, resulting in a significantly longer time to appropriate antibiotics (Table 3). Among ESBL‐EK UTI cases, failure of initial antibiotic therapy was greater for patients who received noncarbapenem ‐lactams (85.7%) as compared to those who empirically received a carbapenem (0%) (P<0.001). Antibiotic failure (>2 patients treated) in ESBL‐EK was highest with the following antibiotics: cefepime (100% [10/10]), piperacillin‐tazobactam (100% [3/3]), and ceftriaxone (76.2% [16/21]).

Clinical and Economic Outcomes of Patients With UTI by ESBL Status
 ESBL Positive, n=55ESBL Negative, n=55Pa
  • NOTE: Data are presented as no. (%) of patients unless specified otherwise.

  • Abbreviations: ESBL, extended‐spectrum ‐lactamase; IQR, interquartile range; UTI, urinary tract infection.

  • By McNemar test, unless specified otherwise.

  • By Wilcoxon signed rank test.

  • Data are in US dollars.

Clinical parameter   
Initial antibiotic failure34 (61.8)3 (5.5)<0.001
Escalation to an alternative antibiotic33 (60.0)3 (5.5)<0.001
Time to appropriate antibiotics, h, median (IQR)51 (32.560.8)2.5 (1.07.2)<0.001b
Appropriate empiric antibiotics13 (23.6)54 (98.2)<0.001
Clinical success47 (85.5)52 (94.5)0.23
All‐cause mortality5 (9.1)1 (1.8)0.21
Infection‐related mortality4 (7.2)1 (1.8)0.37
All‐cause 30‐day readmission12 (21.8)15 (27.2)0.63
UTI‐related 30‐day readmission4 (7.2)2 (3.6)0.68
Economic parameterb   
Length of stay, d, median (IQR)6 (48)4 (36)0.02
Total hospital cost, median (IQR)c10,741 (684615,819)7,083 (566711,652)0.02
Bed cost, % total cost, median (IQR)57.5 (51.666.0)63.8 (51.973.5)0.21
Antibiotic cost, % total cost, median (IQR)0.5 (0.12.0)0.1(0.030.2)<0.001
Primary payor, n (%)   
Medicare44 (80)44 (80)1.00
Medicaid7 (12.7)3 (5.4)0.32
Private insurance2 (3.6)2 (3.6)0.61
Managed care2 (3.6)6 (10.9)0.27

Clinical Outcomes

There were no significant differences in clinical success, mortality, or 30‐day readmission between cohorts (Table 3). Among ESBL‐EK patients, those who received appropriate antibiotics within 48 hours were significantly more likely to achieve treatment success (100% vs 77.1%; P=0.04). All 8 ESBL‐EK treatment failures (4 infection‐related mortality and 4 UTI readmitted with the same ESBL pathogen) failed to receive appropriate antibiotics within 48 hours of culture collection.

More ESBL‐EK patients required a switch in their antibiotics. Within the subgroup of ESBL‐EK patients with an escalation in antibiotics, ertapenem was added to 19 of 33 (57.6%) cases.

Economic Outcomes

ESBL‐EK patients who received inappropriate initial therapy received longer antibiotic treatment courses than those empirically treated with a carbapenem (meanstandard deviation, 8.93.7 vs 6.23.2 days, respectively; P=0.04). When compared to non‐ESBL infection, ESBL‐EK patients required more days of antibiotic therapy (median 8 vs 5 days; P=0.03). The median LOS was significantly longer and total hospital costs were significantly greater for ESBL cases. Antibiotic costs contributed minimally to the overall cost, accounting for <1% (0.5% for cases vs 0.1% for controls), regardless of ESBL status. A comparison of economic outcomes is presented in Table 3. LOS among ESBL cases was not different between those discharged with and without continued antimicrobial therapy. Moreover, for those discharged on antimicrobial therapy, the utilization of either the oral or intravenous route did not delay discharge (data not shown).

The payor mix was similar between cases and controls. Given the predominately elderly population, Medicare was the primary payor for a majority of patients. Median differences in cost and reimbursement between cohorts (ESBL‐EK vs nonESBL‐EK) were $3658 (P=0.02) and $469 (P=0.56), respectively. As a result, median loss per patient with ESBL‐EK infection was $3189 when compared with controls.

Bacteremia

All cases of bacteremia were present on admission. Bacteremic UTI due to ESBL‐EK was associated with initial antibiotic failure (85.7% [6/7] vs 0% [0/5]; P=0.015), delayed appropriate therapy (median, 56 vs 2 hours; P=0.003), longer median hospital stays (11 vs 5 days; P=0.05), and higher median cost ($27,671 vs $5898; P=0.03) as compared with bacteremic UTI due to non‐ESBL‐EK. Infection‐related mortality occurred in 2 ESBL‐EK bacteremic patients, but no mortality was observed among the nonESBL‐EK bacteremic UTI cohort (28.6% [2/7] vs 0% [0/5]; P=0.47].

DISCUSSION

This matched cohort analysis revealed that ESBL‐EK has detrimental effects on the outcomes of patients admitted to the hospital with UTI. While matching for demographics and infecting pathogen, patients with ESBL‐EK UTI had diminished initial antibiotic response and considerably longer time to appropriate antibiotic therapy (48 hours longer) than their non‐ESBL comparator. Despite significant delays in appropriate therapy, we saw no attributable difference in clinical outcome and mortality; however, numerical trends toward increased risk were observed in ESBL‐EK patients. Although clinical response was largely unchanged, prolonged hospitals stays and increased cost of care were endured by ESBL‐EK patients.

Antimicrobial resistance, a primary factor in the postponement of appropriate antibiotic therapy, is a worrisome occurrence with meaningful clinical implications.16[21, 24] In BSI, delayed appropriate therapy due to ESBLs has been associated with prolonged LOS, increased costs, and increased mortality.[20, 25] However, the clinical significance of ESBL production on patient outcomes in UTI remains equivocal. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first matched control analysis evaluating the clinical and economic impact of ESBL specifically in UTI. We saw a 50% increase in the median LOS (from 4 to 6 days) and cost of care (additional $3658 per patient) in the ESBL‐EK UTI cohort. Albeit as small subpopulation, patients with bacteremic UTI due to ESBL‐EK had significantly longer hospital stays and increased cost of care as compared with nonESBL‐EK bacteremic UTI. These economic findings are consistent with data from other investigations. For example, a matched case‐control study of infection (51.5% UTI) due to ESBL‐producing E coli and K pneumoniae by Lautenbach and colleagues found an additional 60‐hour (72 vs 11.5 hours, P<0.001) delay in time to appropriate antibiotics for case patients, resulting in significantly longer LOS (1.8 times) and increased hospital charges (2.9 times).[17] With respect to costs, a matched case‐control analysis of ESBL‐EK in non‐UTI saw a 70% increase in cost ($41,353 vs $24,902).[26] Moreover, the increased cost in that study, like this one, was driven primarily by LOS (additional 9.7 days) and not drug utilization, with antibiotic costs representing <2% of the total hospitalization cost. Tumbarello and colleagues observed an approximate 50% increase in LOS and hospital costs in patients with BSI caused by ESBL‐producing E coli.[20]

Distinctive from those studies, we investigated the significance of ESBL production on hospital reimbursement. Despite the additional healthcare resource utilization (50% greater), we saw no appreciable increase (<5%) in median hospital reimbursement. Given that the primary payors between cohorts were comparable, infection with ESBL‐producing bacteria may result in a potential loss of income if optimal treatment is not initiated on admission.

The risk factors for development of UTI due to ESBL‐EK are well defined.[27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32] Two scoring systems, an Italian and a Duke model, have identified patients at increased risk of harboring ESBL‐producing organisms on hospital admission.[33, 34] The features of each model center on established risk factors for ESBL‐EK UTI. In our study population, these scoring model features were more common in ESBL‐EK patients, supporting their potential application in UTI. However, because of our study design (infected controls) and matching criteria, only 2 features (recent antibiotics and previous hospitalization) achieved statistical significance as detectable risk factors in our population. Regardless, these data, coupled with increasing prevalence of UTI with ESBL‐producing bacteria, provide justification and advocacy for the empiric use of ESBL active antibiotics (ie, carbapenems) in certain high‐risk individuals, particularly those patients with a previous history of ESBL or those with multiple risk factors identified in our study as well as others (previous hospitalization, recent antibiotic exposure). Importantly, an aggressive de‐escalation strategy should be used to temper collateral damage for patients with non‐ESBL infections. Moreover, the utilization of oral therapies beyond the fluoroquinolones and trimethoprim‐sulfamethoxazole, such as fosfomycin and nitrofurantoin, coupled with coordinated transitions of care, may alleviate the demand for intravenous access in patients prepared for discharge.[35, 36]

This study is not without limitations. As only a distinct period in time was studied, we are unable to determine the implications of previous episodes of UTI on the current admission. Although the Charlson comorbidity score was not significantly different between the 2 patient cohorts, ESBL‐EK patients were more likely to have several demographic features (ie, diabetes mellitus, recurrent UTIs, previous hospitalization, and recent antibiotic exposure), which are to be expected in the ESBL population.[37, 38] Although these differences have been observed as expected, we believe the driver of prolonged LOS and increased costs of care stem from inappropriate initial antibiotic therapy as evident by the initial clinical failure observed in ESBL‐EK patients. It should also be noted that we defined antibiotics as appropriate based on the laboratory criteria for susceptibility, as such agents that have high concentration in the urinary tract (ie, fluoroquinolones) may be effective despite these laboratory definitions.[17] For instance, 10 of our ESBL‐EK patients never received appropriate antibiotics (3 fluoroquinolones, 7 noncarbapenem ‐lactams) as defined by laboratory‐based susceptibility testing, 8 of whom experienced clinical success. Previous studies have shown discordance between phenotypic ESBL‐related resistance profiles and outcomes.[17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 25, 39, 40]

In summary, recent increases in antimicrobial resistance present ongoing challenges in the treatment of hospitalized patients, as appropriate treatment options are extremely limited. Our findings strengthen the consortium of data stating that antimicrobial resistance unfavorably impacts patient outcomes.[41, 42] ESBL‐EK in UTI is associated with high rates of failure of initial antibiotic therapy, prolonged LOS, and increased cost of care. Furthermore, the added cost associated with UTI due to ESBL‐EK is not recognized in hospital reimbursement, as evident by a $3200 net loss relative to reimbursement. This loss appears to be solely due to the increased LOS, as antibiotic costs were <1% of cost of care. Moreover, these negative consequences could be even more pronounced at institutions with a higher prevalence of ESBL infection. A multidisciplinary approach (infection control, microbiology) using these data as a benchmark, may enhance the detection, treatment, and prevention of these ESBL‐producing organisms. With high levels of coresistance to noncarbapenem ‐lactams and fluoroquinolones, providers should be cognizant of organisms capable of producing ESBL when selecting initial antibiotic therapy in high‐risk populations. Early recognition and timely initiation of appropriate antibiotic therapy appear paramount to minimizing the burden of ESBL‐EK in patients admitted to the hospital with a UTI.

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Gilbert Fotunato for his assistance with administrative data retrieval.

Disclosures

This work is supported by a grant from Merck & Co., Inc. D.P.N. reports having received grant support and honorarium from Merck & Co., Inc. S.H.M and L.O.T report no conflicts of interest relevant to this article.

Files
References
  1. Litwin MS, Saigal CS, Yano EM, et al. Urologic diseases in America project: analytical methods and principal findings. J Urol. 2005;173(3):933937.
  2. Nicolle LE. Urinary tract pathogens in complicated infection and in elderly individuals. J Infect Dis. 2001;183(suppl 1):S5S8.
  3. Hoban DJ, Nicolle LE, Hawser S, Bouchillon S, Badal R. Antimicrobial susceptibility of global inpatient urinary tract isolates of Escherichia coli: results from the Study for Monitoring Antimicrobial Resistance Trends (SMART) program: 2009–2010. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2011;70(4):507511.
  4. Paterson DL, Bonomo RA. Extended‐spectrum β‐lactamases: a clinical update. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2005;18(4):657686.
  5. Oteo J, Perez‐Vazquez M, Campos J. Extended‐spectrum β‐lactamase producing Escherichia coli: changing epidemiology and clinical impact. Curr Opin Infect Dis. 2010;23(4):320326.
  6. Livermore DM. Defining an extended‐spectrum beta‐lactamase. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2008;14(suppl 5):310.
  7. Reinert RR, Low DE, Rossi F, Zhang X, Wattal C, Dowzicky MJ. Antimicrobial susceptibility among organisms from the Asia/Pacific Rim, Europe and Latin and North America collected as part of TEST and the in vitro activity of tigecycline. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2007;60(5):10181029.
  8. Winokur PL, Canton R, Casellas JM, Legakis N. Variations in the prevalence of strains expressing an extended‐spectrum β‐lactamase phenotype and characterization of isolates from Europe, the Americas, and the Western Pacific region. Clin Infect Dis. 2001;32(suppl 2):S94S103.
  9. National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance (NNIS) System Report, data summary from January 1992 through June 2004. Am J Infect Control. 2004;32(8):470485.
  10. Goossens H, Grabein B. Prevalence and antimicrobial susceptibility data for extended‐spectrum β‐lactamase‐ and AmpC‐producing Enterobacteriaceae from the MYSTIC Program in Europe and the United States (1997–2004). Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2005;53(4):257264.
  11. Pitout JDD, Nordmann P, Laupland KB, Poirel L. Emergence of Enterobacteriaceae producing extended‐spectrum b‐lactamases (ESBLs) in the community. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2005;56(1):5259.
  12. Paterson DL, Mulazimoglu L, Casellas JM, et al. Epidemiology of ciprofloxacin resistance and its relationship to extended‐spectrum B‐lactamase production in Klebsiella pneumoniae isolates causing bacteremia. Clin Infect Dis. 2000;30(4):473478.
  13. Lautenbach E, Strom BL, Bilker WB, Patel JB, Edelstein PH, Fishman NO. Epidemiological investigation of fluoroquinolone resistance in infections due to extended‐spectrum‐β‐lactamase‐producing Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae. Clin Infect Dis. 2001;33(8):12881294.
  14. Schwaber MJ, Navon‐Venezia S, Schwartz D, Carmeli Y. High levels of antimicrobial coresistance among extended‐spectrum‐β‐lactamase‐producing Enterobacteriaceae. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2005;49(5):21372139.
  15. Kollef MH. Inadequate antimicrobial treatment: an important determinant of outcome for hospitalized patients. Clin Infect Dis. 2000;31(suppl 4):S131S138.
  16. Cosgrove SE. The relationship between antimicrobial resistance and patient outcomes: mortality, length of hospital stay, and health care costs. Clin Infect Dis. 2006;42(suppl 2):S82S89.
  17. Lautenbach E, Strom BL, Bilker WB, Patel JB, Edelstein PH, Fishman NO. Extended‐spectrum beta‐lactamase‐producing Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae: risk factors for infection and impact of resistance on outcomes. Clin Infect Dis. 2001:32(8):11621171.
  18. Tumbarello M, Sanguinetti M, Montuori E, et al. Predictors of mortality in patients with bloodstream infections caused by extended‐spectrum‐β‐lactamase‐producing Enterobacteriaceae: importance of inadequate initial antimicrobial treatment. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2007;51(6):19871994.
  19. Schwaber M, Carmeli Y. Mortality and delay in effective therapy associated with extended‐spectrum β lactamase production in Enterobacteriaceae bacteraemia: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2007;60(5):913920.
  20. Tumbarello M, Spanu T, Di Bidino R, et al. Costs of bloodstream infections caused by Escherichia coli and influence of extended‐spectrum‐β‐lactamase production and inadequate initial antibiotic therapy. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2010;54(10):40854091.
  21. Rottier WC, Ammerlann HSM, Bonten MJM. Effects of confounders and intermediates on the association of bacteraemia caused by extended‐spectrum β‐lactamase‐producing Enterobacteriaceae and patient outcome: a meta‐analysis. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2012;67(6):13111320.
  22. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing: 21st informational supplement. M100‐S20. Wayne, PA: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute; 2010.
  23. Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, MacKenzie CR. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis. 1987;40(5):373383.
  24. Kang C, Kim S, Park W, et al. Bloodstream infections caused by antibiotic‐resistant gram‐negative bacilli: risk factors for mortality and impact of inappropriate initial antimicrobial therapy on outcome. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2005;49(2):760766.
  25. Kim BN, Woo JH, Kim MN, Ruy J, Kim YS. Clinical implications of extended‐spectrum beta‐lactamase‐producing Klebsiella pneumoniae bacteraemia. J Hosp Infect. 2002;52(2):99106.
  26. Lee SY, Kotapati S, Kuti JL, Nightingale CH, Nicolau DP. Impact of extended‐spectrum β‐lactamase‐producing Escherichia coli and Klebsiella species on clinical outcomes and hospital costs: a matched cohort study. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2006;27(11):12261232.
  27. Calbo E, Romani V, Xercavins M, et al. Risk factors for community‐onset urinary tract infections due to Escherichia coli harbouring extended‐spectrum‐β‐lactamases. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2006:57(4):780783.
  28. Rodriguez‐Bano J, Alcala JC, Cisneros JM, et al. Community infections caused extended‐spectrum‐β‐lactamase‐producing Escherichia coli. Arch Intern Med. 2008;168(17):18971902.
  29. Lee DS, Lee CB, Lee SJ. Prevalence and risk factors for extended spectrum‐β‐lactamase‐producing uropathogens in urinary tract infection. Korean J Urol. 2010;51(7):492497.
  30. Meier S, Weber R, Zbinden R, Ruef C, Hasse B. Extended‐spectrum β‐lactamase‐producing gram‐negative pathogens in community‐acquired urinary tract infections: an increasing challenge for antimicrobial therapy. Infection. 2011;39(4):333340.
  31. Tinelli M, Cataldo MA, Mantengoli E, et al. Epidemiology and genetic characteristics of extended‐spectrum‐β‐lactamase‐producing gram‐negative bacteria causing urinary tract infections in long‐term care facilities. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2012;67(12):29822987.
  32. Briongos‐Figuero LS, Gomez‐Traveso T, Bachiller‐Luque P, et al. Epidemiology, risk factors and comorbidity for urinary tract infections caused by extended‐spectrum beta‐lactamase (ESBL)‐producing enterobacteria. Int J Clin Pract. 2012;66(9):891896.
  33. Tumbarello M, Trecarichi EM, Bassetti M, et al. Identifying patients harboring extended‐spectrum‐β‐lactamase‐producing Enterobacteriaceae on hospital admission: derivation and validation of a scoring system. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2011;55(7):34853490.
  34. Johnson SW, Anderson DJ, May DB, Drew RH. Utility of a clinical risk factor scoring model in predicting infection with extended‐spectrum‐β‐lactamase‐producing Enterobacteriaceae on hospital admission. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2013;34(4):385392.
  35. Pullukcu H, Tasbakan M, Siphai OR, Yamazhan T, Aydemir S, Ulusoy S. Fosfomycin in the treatment of extended spectrum beta‐lactamase‐producing Escherichia coli‐related lower urinary tract infections. Int J Amtimicrob Agents. 2007;29(1):6265.
  36. Tasbakan MI, Pullukcu H, Sipahi OR, Yamazhan T, Ulusoy . Nitrofurantoin in the treatment of extended‐spectrum beta‐lactamase‐producing Escherichia coli‐related lower urinary tract infection. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2012;40:554556.
  37. Rodriguez‐Bano J, Navarro MD, Romero L, et al. Epidemiology and clinical features of infections caused by extended‐spectrum beta‐lactamase‐producing Escherichia coli in nonhospitalized patients. J Clin Microb. 2004;42(3):10891094.
  38. Rodriguez‐Bano J, Alcala JC, Cisneros JM, et al. Community infections caused by extended‐spectrum β‐lactamase‐producing Escherichia coli. Arch Intern Med. 2008:168(17):18971902.
  39. Du B, Long Y, Liu H, et al. Extended‐spectrum beta‐lactamase‐producing Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae bloodstream infection: risk factors and clinical outcome. Intensive Care Med. 2002;28(12):17181723.
  40. Schiappa DA, Hayden MK, Matushek MG, et al. Ceftazidime‐resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae and Escherichia coli bloodstream infection: a case‐control and molecular epidemiologic investigation. J Infect Dis. 1996;174(3):529536.
  41. Cosgrove SE, Carmel Y. The impact of antimicrobial resistance on health and economic outcomes. Clin Infect Dis. 2003;36(11):14331437.
  42. MacGowan AP. Clinical implications of antimicrobial resistance for therapy. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2008;62(suppl 2):ii105ii114.
Article PDF
Issue
Journal of Hospital Medicine - 9(4)
Page Number
232-238
Sections
Files
Files
Article PDF
Article PDF

Community‐onset urinary tract infection (UTI) is a common bacterial infection encountered in hospital medicine, accounting for >350,000 hospital admissions and $3.4 billion in healthcare costs annually.[1] High proportions of these infections are caused by Enterobacteriaceae, primarily Escherichia coli and Klebsiella species.[2] The prevalence of hospitalized patients with UTI caused by multidrug‐resistant E coli and Klebsiella species has increased.[3, 4, 5] Enterobacteriaceae can produce hydrolytic enzymes, specifically extended‐spectrum ‐lactamases (ESBL), which result in high rates of bacterial resistance to frequently used agents.[6] Global rates vary widely by region, and recent surveillance data showed increasing rates of clinical isolates in North America are ESBL producers.[7, 8, 9, 10] More alarming is the emergence of these resistant organisms in the community.[11]

In addition to ‐lactams, ESBL production is associated with resistance to other antibiotic classes (fluoroquinolones, aminoglycosides, and sulfonamides), and has become an important cause of failed therapy.[12, 13] Consequently, providing adequate and timely antibiotics can become convoluted due to fewer remaining treatment options. Therefore, carbapenems, which are less susceptible to hydrolysis by these enzymes, have become the preferred therapy for infection with ESBL‐producing pathogens.[3, 13, 14]

The consequences of ESBL production, mainly in bloodstream infection (BSI), are well characterized, including notable delays in receipt of appropriate antibiotic therapy, prolonged length of stay (LOS), and increased cost of care.[15, 16] Importantly, others have found higher rates of mortality.[17, 18, 19, 20, 21] However, the impact on outcomes specifically in UTI remains unclear. As a result of the prevalence of UTI admissions to the hospital, the increasing incidence of ESBLs, and the potential impact on the clinical course of care, additional study is required to support best practices for this common diagnosis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Study Subjects and Design

This was a retrospective, matched‐cohort analysis of patients admitted to the hospital with UTI (International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision‐Clinical Modification code 599.0) caused by extended‐spectrum b‐lactamase‐producing Escherichia coli and Klebsiella species (ESBL‐EK). Patients admitted to Hartford Hospital from September 1, 2011 through August 31, 2012 with UTI present on admission (48 hours) were evaluated. Cases were patients 18 years of age, with a positive urine culture (104 CFU/mL) for an ESBL‐producing organism (48 hours of admission), who received antibiotic treatment directed at the positive culture for 48 hours, and beginning prior to availability of in vitro susceptibility results. Cases were identified by a detailed search of the microbiology department database of ESBL‐EK cultures. Only the first positive (index) culture for each patient was included. Bacteremia was defined as isolation of a blood culture organism identical to the one isolated from the urine culture. Patients were excluded if they were discharged, died, or placed on palliative care prior to or on the date of urine collection. Controls (patients admitted with UTI on admission caused by nonESBL‐EK) were matched to cases in a 1:1 fashion on the basis of isolated urinary pathogen, age (5 years), sex, and race. ESBL‐producing organisms were identified and classified according to the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute guidelines.[22]

Data Collection

Once patients were identified, the following information was collected from the patient's medical record by 2 investigators using a standardized case report form: demographic characteristics, comorbid conditions and severity of comorbidities using the Charlson comorbidity index, recent patient medical history, and clinical and economic attributes.[23]

The study was approved by the institutional review board of Hartford Hospital. An informed consent waiver was granted as all data were currently in existence and no patient‐specific interventions were conducted for the study. The collection of data was in compliance with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996.

Outcomes and Definitions

Onset of UTI was defined as the date/time of the index culture collection. An initial antibiotic treatment was a course of therapy initiated empirically (prior to availability of in vitro susceptibility) and that continued for 48 hours. An appropriate empiric antibiotic was defined as an initial antibiotic that ultimately possessed in vitro activity against the isolated pathogen.

The primary clinical outcomes were initial antibiotic response and clinical response. Initial antibiotic response was defined as failure if there was lack of clinical improvement, as evident by a switch to an alternative antibiotic (excluding switches to similar/narrower‐spectrum agents and courses begun at discharge) or infection‐related mortality while receiving the initial antibiotic. Patients were deemed clinical success if they were clinically stable at discharge or end of therapy, whichever occurred first, with resolution of signs and symptoms of infection. Clinical failures were patients with (1) infection‐related mortality or (2) readmission to hospital with UTI within 30 days of discharge. Clinical response was chosen as a primary outcome because significant mortality attributed to UTI was not anticipated. Secondary clinical outcomes included: time to appropriate antibiotic therapy, mortality (all cause and infection related), and 30‐day readmission (all cause and UTI related). Patients were considered to have received appropriate antibiotic therapy when they had received their first dose of antibiotic with activity against the isolated pathogen based on the patient‐specific in vitro susceptibility results. Time to appropriate antibiotics was defined as the elapsed time (hours) between the index culture collection and the initial dose of appropriate antibiotic therapy. All‐cause mortality was defined as any cause of death at the end of hospitalization, whereas infection‐related mortality was defined as death occurring while receiving antibiotics for the index infection, without any other obvious cause of death.

The primary economic outcomes were hospital LOS, costs, and reimbursement. Antibiotic costs were calculated for each patient according to acquisition costs. Additional economic outcomes evaluated were net hospital reimbursement and primary payor. Net hospital reimbursement was calculated as the difference between hospital reimbursement and hospital costs for each patient. Hospital costs were calculated as the direct plus indirect hospitalization costs for each patient, as determined by our institutional accounting department. All economic values were reported in United States dollars.

Statistical Analysis

Statistical comparisons were performed between cases and controls using a paired t test or Wilcoxon signed rank test for continuous variables, where appropriate. Dichotomous variables were compared using the McNemar test. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to calculate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to determine independent risk factors for ESBL‐EK, including all pertinent variables with a P value <0.1 in univariate analyses. All data were analyzed using SigmaStat version 2.03 (IBM/SPSS, Armonk, NY). A P value of 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Patient Population

Between September 2011 and August 2012, there were 220 specimens of ESBL‐related infection and 2345 patients admitted with a UTI on admission. Eighty‐four were confirmed ESBL‐EK cases (3.6%), and 55 met criteria for inclusion. Twenty‐nine of these cases were excluded because the index culture was polymicrobial, for which the response to antibiotics for ESBL‐EK could not be elicited (n=22); they had incomplete medical records (n=4); or they did not have a matched control patient (n=3). Fifty‐five matched control patients were identified, resulting in 110 patients overall.

Patient demographics and baseline characteristics are shown in Table 1. Patients with ESBL‐EK UTI were more likely to have diabetes mellitus, chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder, and a history of recurrent UTIs. They were more likely to have recently received antibiotics, been hospitalized, or had isolation of an ESBL‐producing organism. No significant differences in Charlson comorbidity index, recent immunosuppressive therapy, or urinary catheterization were observed. Compared with controls, patients with ESBL‐EK UTI were more frequently transferred from another healthcare facility, although the difference was not statistically significant (P=0.06). In the multivariate regression model, diabetes mellitus (OR: 4.4, 95% CI: 1.711.5; P=0.002), history of recurrent UTIs (OR: 4.4, 95% CI: 1.810.9; P=0.001), and transfer from another healthcare facility (OR: 2.38, 95% CI: 1.05.7; P=0.05) were independently associated with ESBL‐EK UTI. Previous isolation of an ESBL‐producing organism (P<0.001) was unable to be included in the multivariate logistic regression model because only patients with UTI caused by ESBL‐EK were positive for this variable. However, as noted in Table 1, 27.2% of cases had isolation of an ESBL‐producing organism in the previous year.

Demographics and Baseline Characteristics of UTI Patients by ESBL Status
 ESBL Positive, n=55ESBL Negative, n=55Pa
  • NOTE: Data are presented as no. (%) of patients unless specified otherwise

  • Abbreviations: COPD, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; ESBL, extended‐spectrum ‐lactamase; HIV/AIDS, human immunodeficiency virus/acquired immunodeficiency syndrome; ICU, intensive care unit; IQR, interquartile range; UTI, urinary tract infection.

  • By McNemar test, unless specified otherwise.

  • By Wilcoxon signed rank test.

  • During the 12 months preceding the index hospitalization.

  • During the 3 months preceding index hospitalization.

  • During the 3 months preceding index hospitalization. Defined as chemotherapy, glucocorticoids (equivalent to prednisone 20 mg for at least 2 weeks), or more than 48 hours of any of the following: tacrolimus, sirolimus, cyclosporine, mycophenolate, or antithymocyte globulin.

  • Defined as 2 infections in 6 months or 3 infections in 1 year.

  • During the 30 days preceding the index hospitalization.

  • During the 12 months preceding the index hospitalization.

Demographics   
Age, y, median (IQR)77 (6785)77 (6685)0.83b
Female36 (65.4)36 (65.4)1.00
White42 (76.4)42 (76.4)1.00
Black5 (9.1)5 (9.1)1.00
Hispanic/Latino6 (10.9)6 (10.9)1.00
Other2 (3.6)2 (3.6)1.00
Comorbidities   
Diabetes mellitus25 (45.5)10 (18.1)0.004
COPD15 (27.2)6 (10.9)0.04
Liver disease2 (3.6)1 (1.8)1.00
Hemodialysis9 (16.4)6 (10.9)0.58
Hematological malignancy3 (5.5)2 (3.6)1.00
Solid malignancy13 (23.6)9 (16.4)0.45
HIV/AIDS01 (1.8)1.00
Age >65 years44 (80.0)43 (78.2)1.00
Urinary abnormality15 (27.2)15 (27.2)1.00
Charlson comorbidity index, median (IQR)3 (24)2 (13.8)0.19
History   
Previous hospitalizationc38 (69.1)24 (43.6)0.01
Previous antibioticsd23 (41.8)12 (21.8)0.04
Recent immunosuppressive therapye9 (16.4)3 (5.5)0.11
History of recurrent UTIsf29 (52.7)12 (21.8)0.001
History of urinary catheterizationg18 (32.7)14 (25.4)0.45
Previous genitourinary procedure/surgery10 (18.2)6 (10.9)0.39
Previous ESBL‐producing organismh15 (27.2)0<0.001
Clinical features   
Transfer from another healthcare facility27 (49.1)17 (21.0)0.06
ICU admission12 (21.8)7 (12.7)0.33
Bacteremia7 (12.7)5 (9.1)0.75
Infectious Diseases consulted39 (70.1)16 (29.1)<0.001
Empiric ‐lactam (noncarbapenem)35 (63.6)50 (90.9)0.001

Isolate Characteristics

The distribution of causative pathogens in each cohort was: 44 (80%) Escherichia coli, 8 (14.5%) Klebsiella pneumoniae, and 3 (5.5%) Klebsiella oxytoca. In vitro nonsusceptibility profiles of the 55 ESBL‐EK cases are characterized in Figure 1. The most active agents were carbapenems, with 98.2% susceptibility to the entire isolate profile, whereas <10% of isolates were susceptible to the fluoroquinolones. All ESBL‐producing isolates were resistant to cefepime.

Figure 1
In vitro nonsusceptibility profiles of the 55 Escherichia coli and Klebsiella species urinary tract infection isolates (E coli [black bars] and Klebsiella species [gray bars]). Abbreviations: CIP, ciprofloxacin; CRO, ceftriaxone; ERT, ertapenem; FEP, cefepime; FOX, cefoxitin; GEN, gentamicin; LVX, levofloxacin; MEM, meropenem; NIT, nitrofurantoin; SAM, ampicillin‐sulbactam; SXT, trimethoprim‐sulfamethoxazole; TET, tetracycline; TOB, tobramycin.

Failure on Initial Antibiotic Regimen

Initial antibiotic therapy is shown in Table 2. A majority of patients (87.2%) were initially treated with a ‐lactam. Empiric carbapenem use was greater in ESBL‐EK cases (18.1% vs 0%; P<0.001), and there were no other significant differences in the distribution of initial antibiotic therapy between cohorts. Less than one‐quarter of ESBL‐EK patients (23.6%) received appropriate initial therapy, whereas 98.2% of controls were initially treated appropriately (P<0.001).

Initial Antibiotics Received by Patients With Urinary Tract Infection According to ESBL Status
Initial AntibioticESBL Positive, n=55ESBL Negative, n=55Pa
  • NOTE: Data are presented as no. (%) of patients. Abbreviations: ESBL, extended‐spectrum ‐lactamase.

  • By McNemar test.

Ceftriaxone21 (38.1)32 (58.1)0.06
Cefepime10 (18.2)12 (21.8)0.81
Ertapenem7 (12.7)00.02
Levofloxacin6 (10.9)4 (7.3)0.74
Cefazolin04 (7.3)0.13
Piperacillin‐tazobactam3 (5.5)00.24
Ciprofloxacin2 (3.6)1 (1.8)1.00
Doripenem2 (3.6)00.48
Trimethoprim‐sulfamethoxazole2 (3.6)00.48
Meropenem1 (1.8)01.00
Cephalexin1 (1.8)01.00
Aztreonam02 (3.6)0.48

Compared with controls, failure of initial antibiotic therapy was more common in patients with ESBL‐EK UTI, resulting in a significantly longer time to appropriate antibiotics (Table 3). Among ESBL‐EK UTI cases, failure of initial antibiotic therapy was greater for patients who received noncarbapenem ‐lactams (85.7%) as compared to those who empirically received a carbapenem (0%) (P<0.001). Antibiotic failure (>2 patients treated) in ESBL‐EK was highest with the following antibiotics: cefepime (100% [10/10]), piperacillin‐tazobactam (100% [3/3]), and ceftriaxone (76.2% [16/21]).

Clinical and Economic Outcomes of Patients With UTI by ESBL Status
 ESBL Positive, n=55ESBL Negative, n=55Pa
  • NOTE: Data are presented as no. (%) of patients unless specified otherwise.

  • Abbreviations: ESBL, extended‐spectrum ‐lactamase; IQR, interquartile range; UTI, urinary tract infection.

  • By McNemar test, unless specified otherwise.

  • By Wilcoxon signed rank test.

  • Data are in US dollars.

Clinical parameter   
Initial antibiotic failure34 (61.8)3 (5.5)<0.001
Escalation to an alternative antibiotic33 (60.0)3 (5.5)<0.001
Time to appropriate antibiotics, h, median (IQR)51 (32.560.8)2.5 (1.07.2)<0.001b
Appropriate empiric antibiotics13 (23.6)54 (98.2)<0.001
Clinical success47 (85.5)52 (94.5)0.23
All‐cause mortality5 (9.1)1 (1.8)0.21
Infection‐related mortality4 (7.2)1 (1.8)0.37
All‐cause 30‐day readmission12 (21.8)15 (27.2)0.63
UTI‐related 30‐day readmission4 (7.2)2 (3.6)0.68
Economic parameterb   
Length of stay, d, median (IQR)6 (48)4 (36)0.02
Total hospital cost, median (IQR)c10,741 (684615,819)7,083 (566711,652)0.02
Bed cost, % total cost, median (IQR)57.5 (51.666.0)63.8 (51.973.5)0.21
Antibiotic cost, % total cost, median (IQR)0.5 (0.12.0)0.1(0.030.2)<0.001
Primary payor, n (%)   
Medicare44 (80)44 (80)1.00
Medicaid7 (12.7)3 (5.4)0.32
Private insurance2 (3.6)2 (3.6)0.61
Managed care2 (3.6)6 (10.9)0.27

Clinical Outcomes

There were no significant differences in clinical success, mortality, or 30‐day readmission between cohorts (Table 3). Among ESBL‐EK patients, those who received appropriate antibiotics within 48 hours were significantly more likely to achieve treatment success (100% vs 77.1%; P=0.04). All 8 ESBL‐EK treatment failures (4 infection‐related mortality and 4 UTI readmitted with the same ESBL pathogen) failed to receive appropriate antibiotics within 48 hours of culture collection.

More ESBL‐EK patients required a switch in their antibiotics. Within the subgroup of ESBL‐EK patients with an escalation in antibiotics, ertapenem was added to 19 of 33 (57.6%) cases.

Economic Outcomes

ESBL‐EK patients who received inappropriate initial therapy received longer antibiotic treatment courses than those empirically treated with a carbapenem (meanstandard deviation, 8.93.7 vs 6.23.2 days, respectively; P=0.04). When compared to non‐ESBL infection, ESBL‐EK patients required more days of antibiotic therapy (median 8 vs 5 days; P=0.03). The median LOS was significantly longer and total hospital costs were significantly greater for ESBL cases. Antibiotic costs contributed minimally to the overall cost, accounting for <1% (0.5% for cases vs 0.1% for controls), regardless of ESBL status. A comparison of economic outcomes is presented in Table 3. LOS among ESBL cases was not different between those discharged with and without continued antimicrobial therapy. Moreover, for those discharged on antimicrobial therapy, the utilization of either the oral or intravenous route did not delay discharge (data not shown).

The payor mix was similar between cases and controls. Given the predominately elderly population, Medicare was the primary payor for a majority of patients. Median differences in cost and reimbursement between cohorts (ESBL‐EK vs nonESBL‐EK) were $3658 (P=0.02) and $469 (P=0.56), respectively. As a result, median loss per patient with ESBL‐EK infection was $3189 when compared with controls.

Bacteremia

All cases of bacteremia were present on admission. Bacteremic UTI due to ESBL‐EK was associated with initial antibiotic failure (85.7% [6/7] vs 0% [0/5]; P=0.015), delayed appropriate therapy (median, 56 vs 2 hours; P=0.003), longer median hospital stays (11 vs 5 days; P=0.05), and higher median cost ($27,671 vs $5898; P=0.03) as compared with bacteremic UTI due to non‐ESBL‐EK. Infection‐related mortality occurred in 2 ESBL‐EK bacteremic patients, but no mortality was observed among the nonESBL‐EK bacteremic UTI cohort (28.6% [2/7] vs 0% [0/5]; P=0.47].

DISCUSSION

This matched cohort analysis revealed that ESBL‐EK has detrimental effects on the outcomes of patients admitted to the hospital with UTI. While matching for demographics and infecting pathogen, patients with ESBL‐EK UTI had diminished initial antibiotic response and considerably longer time to appropriate antibiotic therapy (48 hours longer) than their non‐ESBL comparator. Despite significant delays in appropriate therapy, we saw no attributable difference in clinical outcome and mortality; however, numerical trends toward increased risk were observed in ESBL‐EK patients. Although clinical response was largely unchanged, prolonged hospitals stays and increased cost of care were endured by ESBL‐EK patients.

Antimicrobial resistance, a primary factor in the postponement of appropriate antibiotic therapy, is a worrisome occurrence with meaningful clinical implications.16[21, 24] In BSI, delayed appropriate therapy due to ESBLs has been associated with prolonged LOS, increased costs, and increased mortality.[20, 25] However, the clinical significance of ESBL production on patient outcomes in UTI remains equivocal. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first matched control analysis evaluating the clinical and economic impact of ESBL specifically in UTI. We saw a 50% increase in the median LOS (from 4 to 6 days) and cost of care (additional $3658 per patient) in the ESBL‐EK UTI cohort. Albeit as small subpopulation, patients with bacteremic UTI due to ESBL‐EK had significantly longer hospital stays and increased cost of care as compared with nonESBL‐EK bacteremic UTI. These economic findings are consistent with data from other investigations. For example, a matched case‐control study of infection (51.5% UTI) due to ESBL‐producing E coli and K pneumoniae by Lautenbach and colleagues found an additional 60‐hour (72 vs 11.5 hours, P<0.001) delay in time to appropriate antibiotics for case patients, resulting in significantly longer LOS (1.8 times) and increased hospital charges (2.9 times).[17] With respect to costs, a matched case‐control analysis of ESBL‐EK in non‐UTI saw a 70% increase in cost ($41,353 vs $24,902).[26] Moreover, the increased cost in that study, like this one, was driven primarily by LOS (additional 9.7 days) and not drug utilization, with antibiotic costs representing <2% of the total hospitalization cost. Tumbarello and colleagues observed an approximate 50% increase in LOS and hospital costs in patients with BSI caused by ESBL‐producing E coli.[20]

Distinctive from those studies, we investigated the significance of ESBL production on hospital reimbursement. Despite the additional healthcare resource utilization (50% greater), we saw no appreciable increase (<5%) in median hospital reimbursement. Given that the primary payors between cohorts were comparable, infection with ESBL‐producing bacteria may result in a potential loss of income if optimal treatment is not initiated on admission.

The risk factors for development of UTI due to ESBL‐EK are well defined.[27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32] Two scoring systems, an Italian and a Duke model, have identified patients at increased risk of harboring ESBL‐producing organisms on hospital admission.[33, 34] The features of each model center on established risk factors for ESBL‐EK UTI. In our study population, these scoring model features were more common in ESBL‐EK patients, supporting their potential application in UTI. However, because of our study design (infected controls) and matching criteria, only 2 features (recent antibiotics and previous hospitalization) achieved statistical significance as detectable risk factors in our population. Regardless, these data, coupled with increasing prevalence of UTI with ESBL‐producing bacteria, provide justification and advocacy for the empiric use of ESBL active antibiotics (ie, carbapenems) in certain high‐risk individuals, particularly those patients with a previous history of ESBL or those with multiple risk factors identified in our study as well as others (previous hospitalization, recent antibiotic exposure). Importantly, an aggressive de‐escalation strategy should be used to temper collateral damage for patients with non‐ESBL infections. Moreover, the utilization of oral therapies beyond the fluoroquinolones and trimethoprim‐sulfamethoxazole, such as fosfomycin and nitrofurantoin, coupled with coordinated transitions of care, may alleviate the demand for intravenous access in patients prepared for discharge.[35, 36]

This study is not without limitations. As only a distinct period in time was studied, we are unable to determine the implications of previous episodes of UTI on the current admission. Although the Charlson comorbidity score was not significantly different between the 2 patient cohorts, ESBL‐EK patients were more likely to have several demographic features (ie, diabetes mellitus, recurrent UTIs, previous hospitalization, and recent antibiotic exposure), which are to be expected in the ESBL population.[37, 38] Although these differences have been observed as expected, we believe the driver of prolonged LOS and increased costs of care stem from inappropriate initial antibiotic therapy as evident by the initial clinical failure observed in ESBL‐EK patients. It should also be noted that we defined antibiotics as appropriate based on the laboratory criteria for susceptibility, as such agents that have high concentration in the urinary tract (ie, fluoroquinolones) may be effective despite these laboratory definitions.[17] For instance, 10 of our ESBL‐EK patients never received appropriate antibiotics (3 fluoroquinolones, 7 noncarbapenem ‐lactams) as defined by laboratory‐based susceptibility testing, 8 of whom experienced clinical success. Previous studies have shown discordance between phenotypic ESBL‐related resistance profiles and outcomes.[17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 25, 39, 40]

In summary, recent increases in antimicrobial resistance present ongoing challenges in the treatment of hospitalized patients, as appropriate treatment options are extremely limited. Our findings strengthen the consortium of data stating that antimicrobial resistance unfavorably impacts patient outcomes.[41, 42] ESBL‐EK in UTI is associated with high rates of failure of initial antibiotic therapy, prolonged LOS, and increased cost of care. Furthermore, the added cost associated with UTI due to ESBL‐EK is not recognized in hospital reimbursement, as evident by a $3200 net loss relative to reimbursement. This loss appears to be solely due to the increased LOS, as antibiotic costs were <1% of cost of care. Moreover, these negative consequences could be even more pronounced at institutions with a higher prevalence of ESBL infection. A multidisciplinary approach (infection control, microbiology) using these data as a benchmark, may enhance the detection, treatment, and prevention of these ESBL‐producing organisms. With high levels of coresistance to noncarbapenem ‐lactams and fluoroquinolones, providers should be cognizant of organisms capable of producing ESBL when selecting initial antibiotic therapy in high‐risk populations. Early recognition and timely initiation of appropriate antibiotic therapy appear paramount to minimizing the burden of ESBL‐EK in patients admitted to the hospital with a UTI.

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Gilbert Fotunato for his assistance with administrative data retrieval.

Disclosures

This work is supported by a grant from Merck & Co., Inc. D.P.N. reports having received grant support and honorarium from Merck & Co., Inc. S.H.M and L.O.T report no conflicts of interest relevant to this article.

Community‐onset urinary tract infection (UTI) is a common bacterial infection encountered in hospital medicine, accounting for >350,000 hospital admissions and $3.4 billion in healthcare costs annually.[1] High proportions of these infections are caused by Enterobacteriaceae, primarily Escherichia coli and Klebsiella species.[2] The prevalence of hospitalized patients with UTI caused by multidrug‐resistant E coli and Klebsiella species has increased.[3, 4, 5] Enterobacteriaceae can produce hydrolytic enzymes, specifically extended‐spectrum ‐lactamases (ESBL), which result in high rates of bacterial resistance to frequently used agents.[6] Global rates vary widely by region, and recent surveillance data showed increasing rates of clinical isolates in North America are ESBL producers.[7, 8, 9, 10] More alarming is the emergence of these resistant organisms in the community.[11]

In addition to ‐lactams, ESBL production is associated with resistance to other antibiotic classes (fluoroquinolones, aminoglycosides, and sulfonamides), and has become an important cause of failed therapy.[12, 13] Consequently, providing adequate and timely antibiotics can become convoluted due to fewer remaining treatment options. Therefore, carbapenems, which are less susceptible to hydrolysis by these enzymes, have become the preferred therapy for infection with ESBL‐producing pathogens.[3, 13, 14]

The consequences of ESBL production, mainly in bloodstream infection (BSI), are well characterized, including notable delays in receipt of appropriate antibiotic therapy, prolonged length of stay (LOS), and increased cost of care.[15, 16] Importantly, others have found higher rates of mortality.[17, 18, 19, 20, 21] However, the impact on outcomes specifically in UTI remains unclear. As a result of the prevalence of UTI admissions to the hospital, the increasing incidence of ESBLs, and the potential impact on the clinical course of care, additional study is required to support best practices for this common diagnosis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Study Subjects and Design

This was a retrospective, matched‐cohort analysis of patients admitted to the hospital with UTI (International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision‐Clinical Modification code 599.0) caused by extended‐spectrum b‐lactamase‐producing Escherichia coli and Klebsiella species (ESBL‐EK). Patients admitted to Hartford Hospital from September 1, 2011 through August 31, 2012 with UTI present on admission (48 hours) were evaluated. Cases were patients 18 years of age, with a positive urine culture (104 CFU/mL) for an ESBL‐producing organism (48 hours of admission), who received antibiotic treatment directed at the positive culture for 48 hours, and beginning prior to availability of in vitro susceptibility results. Cases were identified by a detailed search of the microbiology department database of ESBL‐EK cultures. Only the first positive (index) culture for each patient was included. Bacteremia was defined as isolation of a blood culture organism identical to the one isolated from the urine culture. Patients were excluded if they were discharged, died, or placed on palliative care prior to or on the date of urine collection. Controls (patients admitted with UTI on admission caused by nonESBL‐EK) were matched to cases in a 1:1 fashion on the basis of isolated urinary pathogen, age (5 years), sex, and race. ESBL‐producing organisms were identified and classified according to the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute guidelines.[22]

Data Collection

Once patients were identified, the following information was collected from the patient's medical record by 2 investigators using a standardized case report form: demographic characteristics, comorbid conditions and severity of comorbidities using the Charlson comorbidity index, recent patient medical history, and clinical and economic attributes.[23]

The study was approved by the institutional review board of Hartford Hospital. An informed consent waiver was granted as all data were currently in existence and no patient‐specific interventions were conducted for the study. The collection of data was in compliance with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996.

Outcomes and Definitions

Onset of UTI was defined as the date/time of the index culture collection. An initial antibiotic treatment was a course of therapy initiated empirically (prior to availability of in vitro susceptibility) and that continued for 48 hours. An appropriate empiric antibiotic was defined as an initial antibiotic that ultimately possessed in vitro activity against the isolated pathogen.

The primary clinical outcomes were initial antibiotic response and clinical response. Initial antibiotic response was defined as failure if there was lack of clinical improvement, as evident by a switch to an alternative antibiotic (excluding switches to similar/narrower‐spectrum agents and courses begun at discharge) or infection‐related mortality while receiving the initial antibiotic. Patients were deemed clinical success if they were clinically stable at discharge or end of therapy, whichever occurred first, with resolution of signs and symptoms of infection. Clinical failures were patients with (1) infection‐related mortality or (2) readmission to hospital with UTI within 30 days of discharge. Clinical response was chosen as a primary outcome because significant mortality attributed to UTI was not anticipated. Secondary clinical outcomes included: time to appropriate antibiotic therapy, mortality (all cause and infection related), and 30‐day readmission (all cause and UTI related). Patients were considered to have received appropriate antibiotic therapy when they had received their first dose of antibiotic with activity against the isolated pathogen based on the patient‐specific in vitro susceptibility results. Time to appropriate antibiotics was defined as the elapsed time (hours) between the index culture collection and the initial dose of appropriate antibiotic therapy. All‐cause mortality was defined as any cause of death at the end of hospitalization, whereas infection‐related mortality was defined as death occurring while receiving antibiotics for the index infection, without any other obvious cause of death.

The primary economic outcomes were hospital LOS, costs, and reimbursement. Antibiotic costs were calculated for each patient according to acquisition costs. Additional economic outcomes evaluated were net hospital reimbursement and primary payor. Net hospital reimbursement was calculated as the difference between hospital reimbursement and hospital costs for each patient. Hospital costs were calculated as the direct plus indirect hospitalization costs for each patient, as determined by our institutional accounting department. All economic values were reported in United States dollars.

Statistical Analysis

Statistical comparisons were performed between cases and controls using a paired t test or Wilcoxon signed rank test for continuous variables, where appropriate. Dichotomous variables were compared using the McNemar test. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to calculate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to determine independent risk factors for ESBL‐EK, including all pertinent variables with a P value <0.1 in univariate analyses. All data were analyzed using SigmaStat version 2.03 (IBM/SPSS, Armonk, NY). A P value of 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Patient Population

Between September 2011 and August 2012, there were 220 specimens of ESBL‐related infection and 2345 patients admitted with a UTI on admission. Eighty‐four were confirmed ESBL‐EK cases (3.6%), and 55 met criteria for inclusion. Twenty‐nine of these cases were excluded because the index culture was polymicrobial, for which the response to antibiotics for ESBL‐EK could not be elicited (n=22); they had incomplete medical records (n=4); or they did not have a matched control patient (n=3). Fifty‐five matched control patients were identified, resulting in 110 patients overall.

Patient demographics and baseline characteristics are shown in Table 1. Patients with ESBL‐EK UTI were more likely to have diabetes mellitus, chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder, and a history of recurrent UTIs. They were more likely to have recently received antibiotics, been hospitalized, or had isolation of an ESBL‐producing organism. No significant differences in Charlson comorbidity index, recent immunosuppressive therapy, or urinary catheterization were observed. Compared with controls, patients with ESBL‐EK UTI were more frequently transferred from another healthcare facility, although the difference was not statistically significant (P=0.06). In the multivariate regression model, diabetes mellitus (OR: 4.4, 95% CI: 1.711.5; P=0.002), history of recurrent UTIs (OR: 4.4, 95% CI: 1.810.9; P=0.001), and transfer from another healthcare facility (OR: 2.38, 95% CI: 1.05.7; P=0.05) were independently associated with ESBL‐EK UTI. Previous isolation of an ESBL‐producing organism (P<0.001) was unable to be included in the multivariate logistic regression model because only patients with UTI caused by ESBL‐EK were positive for this variable. However, as noted in Table 1, 27.2% of cases had isolation of an ESBL‐producing organism in the previous year.

Demographics and Baseline Characteristics of UTI Patients by ESBL Status
 ESBL Positive, n=55ESBL Negative, n=55Pa
  • NOTE: Data are presented as no. (%) of patients unless specified otherwise

  • Abbreviations: COPD, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; ESBL, extended‐spectrum ‐lactamase; HIV/AIDS, human immunodeficiency virus/acquired immunodeficiency syndrome; ICU, intensive care unit; IQR, interquartile range; UTI, urinary tract infection.

  • By McNemar test, unless specified otherwise.

  • By Wilcoxon signed rank test.

  • During the 12 months preceding the index hospitalization.

  • During the 3 months preceding index hospitalization.

  • During the 3 months preceding index hospitalization. Defined as chemotherapy, glucocorticoids (equivalent to prednisone 20 mg for at least 2 weeks), or more than 48 hours of any of the following: tacrolimus, sirolimus, cyclosporine, mycophenolate, or antithymocyte globulin.

  • Defined as 2 infections in 6 months or 3 infections in 1 year.

  • During the 30 days preceding the index hospitalization.

  • During the 12 months preceding the index hospitalization.

Demographics   
Age, y, median (IQR)77 (6785)77 (6685)0.83b
Female36 (65.4)36 (65.4)1.00
White42 (76.4)42 (76.4)1.00
Black5 (9.1)5 (9.1)1.00
Hispanic/Latino6 (10.9)6 (10.9)1.00
Other2 (3.6)2 (3.6)1.00
Comorbidities   
Diabetes mellitus25 (45.5)10 (18.1)0.004
COPD15 (27.2)6 (10.9)0.04
Liver disease2 (3.6)1 (1.8)1.00
Hemodialysis9 (16.4)6 (10.9)0.58
Hematological malignancy3 (5.5)2 (3.6)1.00
Solid malignancy13 (23.6)9 (16.4)0.45
HIV/AIDS01 (1.8)1.00
Age >65 years44 (80.0)43 (78.2)1.00
Urinary abnormality15 (27.2)15 (27.2)1.00
Charlson comorbidity index, median (IQR)3 (24)2 (13.8)0.19
History   
Previous hospitalizationc38 (69.1)24 (43.6)0.01
Previous antibioticsd23 (41.8)12 (21.8)0.04
Recent immunosuppressive therapye9 (16.4)3 (5.5)0.11
History of recurrent UTIsf29 (52.7)12 (21.8)0.001
History of urinary catheterizationg18 (32.7)14 (25.4)0.45
Previous genitourinary procedure/surgery10 (18.2)6 (10.9)0.39
Previous ESBL‐producing organismh15 (27.2)0<0.001
Clinical features   
Transfer from another healthcare facility27 (49.1)17 (21.0)0.06
ICU admission12 (21.8)7 (12.7)0.33
Bacteremia7 (12.7)5 (9.1)0.75
Infectious Diseases consulted39 (70.1)16 (29.1)<0.001
Empiric ‐lactam (noncarbapenem)35 (63.6)50 (90.9)0.001

Isolate Characteristics

The distribution of causative pathogens in each cohort was: 44 (80%) Escherichia coli, 8 (14.5%) Klebsiella pneumoniae, and 3 (5.5%) Klebsiella oxytoca. In vitro nonsusceptibility profiles of the 55 ESBL‐EK cases are characterized in Figure 1. The most active agents were carbapenems, with 98.2% susceptibility to the entire isolate profile, whereas <10% of isolates were susceptible to the fluoroquinolones. All ESBL‐producing isolates were resistant to cefepime.

Figure 1
In vitro nonsusceptibility profiles of the 55 Escherichia coli and Klebsiella species urinary tract infection isolates (E coli [black bars] and Klebsiella species [gray bars]). Abbreviations: CIP, ciprofloxacin; CRO, ceftriaxone; ERT, ertapenem; FEP, cefepime; FOX, cefoxitin; GEN, gentamicin; LVX, levofloxacin; MEM, meropenem; NIT, nitrofurantoin; SAM, ampicillin‐sulbactam; SXT, trimethoprim‐sulfamethoxazole; TET, tetracycline; TOB, tobramycin.

Failure on Initial Antibiotic Regimen

Initial antibiotic therapy is shown in Table 2. A majority of patients (87.2%) were initially treated with a ‐lactam. Empiric carbapenem use was greater in ESBL‐EK cases (18.1% vs 0%; P<0.001), and there were no other significant differences in the distribution of initial antibiotic therapy between cohorts. Less than one‐quarter of ESBL‐EK patients (23.6%) received appropriate initial therapy, whereas 98.2% of controls were initially treated appropriately (P<0.001).

Initial Antibiotics Received by Patients With Urinary Tract Infection According to ESBL Status
Initial AntibioticESBL Positive, n=55ESBL Negative, n=55Pa
  • NOTE: Data are presented as no. (%) of patients. Abbreviations: ESBL, extended‐spectrum ‐lactamase.

  • By McNemar test.

Ceftriaxone21 (38.1)32 (58.1)0.06
Cefepime10 (18.2)12 (21.8)0.81
Ertapenem7 (12.7)00.02
Levofloxacin6 (10.9)4 (7.3)0.74
Cefazolin04 (7.3)0.13
Piperacillin‐tazobactam3 (5.5)00.24
Ciprofloxacin2 (3.6)1 (1.8)1.00
Doripenem2 (3.6)00.48
Trimethoprim‐sulfamethoxazole2 (3.6)00.48
Meropenem1 (1.8)01.00
Cephalexin1 (1.8)01.00
Aztreonam02 (3.6)0.48

Compared with controls, failure of initial antibiotic therapy was more common in patients with ESBL‐EK UTI, resulting in a significantly longer time to appropriate antibiotics (Table 3). Among ESBL‐EK UTI cases, failure of initial antibiotic therapy was greater for patients who received noncarbapenem ‐lactams (85.7%) as compared to those who empirically received a carbapenem (0%) (P<0.001). Antibiotic failure (>2 patients treated) in ESBL‐EK was highest with the following antibiotics: cefepime (100% [10/10]), piperacillin‐tazobactam (100% [3/3]), and ceftriaxone (76.2% [16/21]).

Clinical and Economic Outcomes of Patients With UTI by ESBL Status
 ESBL Positive, n=55ESBL Negative, n=55Pa
  • NOTE: Data are presented as no. (%) of patients unless specified otherwise.

  • Abbreviations: ESBL, extended‐spectrum ‐lactamase; IQR, interquartile range; UTI, urinary tract infection.

  • By McNemar test, unless specified otherwise.

  • By Wilcoxon signed rank test.

  • Data are in US dollars.

Clinical parameter   
Initial antibiotic failure34 (61.8)3 (5.5)<0.001
Escalation to an alternative antibiotic33 (60.0)3 (5.5)<0.001
Time to appropriate antibiotics, h, median (IQR)51 (32.560.8)2.5 (1.07.2)<0.001b
Appropriate empiric antibiotics13 (23.6)54 (98.2)<0.001
Clinical success47 (85.5)52 (94.5)0.23
All‐cause mortality5 (9.1)1 (1.8)0.21
Infection‐related mortality4 (7.2)1 (1.8)0.37
All‐cause 30‐day readmission12 (21.8)15 (27.2)0.63
UTI‐related 30‐day readmission4 (7.2)2 (3.6)0.68
Economic parameterb   
Length of stay, d, median (IQR)6 (48)4 (36)0.02
Total hospital cost, median (IQR)c10,741 (684615,819)7,083 (566711,652)0.02
Bed cost, % total cost, median (IQR)57.5 (51.666.0)63.8 (51.973.5)0.21
Antibiotic cost, % total cost, median (IQR)0.5 (0.12.0)0.1(0.030.2)<0.001
Primary payor, n (%)   
Medicare44 (80)44 (80)1.00
Medicaid7 (12.7)3 (5.4)0.32
Private insurance2 (3.6)2 (3.6)0.61
Managed care2 (3.6)6 (10.9)0.27

Clinical Outcomes

There were no significant differences in clinical success, mortality, or 30‐day readmission between cohorts (Table 3). Among ESBL‐EK patients, those who received appropriate antibiotics within 48 hours were significantly more likely to achieve treatment success (100% vs 77.1%; P=0.04). All 8 ESBL‐EK treatment failures (4 infection‐related mortality and 4 UTI readmitted with the same ESBL pathogen) failed to receive appropriate antibiotics within 48 hours of culture collection.

More ESBL‐EK patients required a switch in their antibiotics. Within the subgroup of ESBL‐EK patients with an escalation in antibiotics, ertapenem was added to 19 of 33 (57.6%) cases.

Economic Outcomes

ESBL‐EK patients who received inappropriate initial therapy received longer antibiotic treatment courses than those empirically treated with a carbapenem (meanstandard deviation, 8.93.7 vs 6.23.2 days, respectively; P=0.04). When compared to non‐ESBL infection, ESBL‐EK patients required more days of antibiotic therapy (median 8 vs 5 days; P=0.03). The median LOS was significantly longer and total hospital costs were significantly greater for ESBL cases. Antibiotic costs contributed minimally to the overall cost, accounting for <1% (0.5% for cases vs 0.1% for controls), regardless of ESBL status. A comparison of economic outcomes is presented in Table 3. LOS among ESBL cases was not different between those discharged with and without continued antimicrobial therapy. Moreover, for those discharged on antimicrobial therapy, the utilization of either the oral or intravenous route did not delay discharge (data not shown).

The payor mix was similar between cases and controls. Given the predominately elderly population, Medicare was the primary payor for a majority of patients. Median differences in cost and reimbursement between cohorts (ESBL‐EK vs nonESBL‐EK) were $3658 (P=0.02) and $469 (P=0.56), respectively. As a result, median loss per patient with ESBL‐EK infection was $3189 when compared with controls.

Bacteremia

All cases of bacteremia were present on admission. Bacteremic UTI due to ESBL‐EK was associated with initial antibiotic failure (85.7% [6/7] vs 0% [0/5]; P=0.015), delayed appropriate therapy (median, 56 vs 2 hours; P=0.003), longer median hospital stays (11 vs 5 days; P=0.05), and higher median cost ($27,671 vs $5898; P=0.03) as compared with bacteremic UTI due to non‐ESBL‐EK. Infection‐related mortality occurred in 2 ESBL‐EK bacteremic patients, but no mortality was observed among the nonESBL‐EK bacteremic UTI cohort (28.6% [2/7] vs 0% [0/5]; P=0.47].

DISCUSSION

This matched cohort analysis revealed that ESBL‐EK has detrimental effects on the outcomes of patients admitted to the hospital with UTI. While matching for demographics and infecting pathogen, patients with ESBL‐EK UTI had diminished initial antibiotic response and considerably longer time to appropriate antibiotic therapy (48 hours longer) than their non‐ESBL comparator. Despite significant delays in appropriate therapy, we saw no attributable difference in clinical outcome and mortality; however, numerical trends toward increased risk were observed in ESBL‐EK patients. Although clinical response was largely unchanged, prolonged hospitals stays and increased cost of care were endured by ESBL‐EK patients.

Antimicrobial resistance, a primary factor in the postponement of appropriate antibiotic therapy, is a worrisome occurrence with meaningful clinical implications.16[21, 24] In BSI, delayed appropriate therapy due to ESBLs has been associated with prolonged LOS, increased costs, and increased mortality.[20, 25] However, the clinical significance of ESBL production on patient outcomes in UTI remains equivocal. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first matched control analysis evaluating the clinical and economic impact of ESBL specifically in UTI. We saw a 50% increase in the median LOS (from 4 to 6 days) and cost of care (additional $3658 per patient) in the ESBL‐EK UTI cohort. Albeit as small subpopulation, patients with bacteremic UTI due to ESBL‐EK had significantly longer hospital stays and increased cost of care as compared with nonESBL‐EK bacteremic UTI. These economic findings are consistent with data from other investigations. For example, a matched case‐control study of infection (51.5% UTI) due to ESBL‐producing E coli and K pneumoniae by Lautenbach and colleagues found an additional 60‐hour (72 vs 11.5 hours, P<0.001) delay in time to appropriate antibiotics for case patients, resulting in significantly longer LOS (1.8 times) and increased hospital charges (2.9 times).[17] With respect to costs, a matched case‐control analysis of ESBL‐EK in non‐UTI saw a 70% increase in cost ($41,353 vs $24,902).[26] Moreover, the increased cost in that study, like this one, was driven primarily by LOS (additional 9.7 days) and not drug utilization, with antibiotic costs representing <2% of the total hospitalization cost. Tumbarello and colleagues observed an approximate 50% increase in LOS and hospital costs in patients with BSI caused by ESBL‐producing E coli.[20]

Distinctive from those studies, we investigated the significance of ESBL production on hospital reimbursement. Despite the additional healthcare resource utilization (50% greater), we saw no appreciable increase (<5%) in median hospital reimbursement. Given that the primary payors between cohorts were comparable, infection with ESBL‐producing bacteria may result in a potential loss of income if optimal treatment is not initiated on admission.

The risk factors for development of UTI due to ESBL‐EK are well defined.[27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32] Two scoring systems, an Italian and a Duke model, have identified patients at increased risk of harboring ESBL‐producing organisms on hospital admission.[33, 34] The features of each model center on established risk factors for ESBL‐EK UTI. In our study population, these scoring model features were more common in ESBL‐EK patients, supporting their potential application in UTI. However, because of our study design (infected controls) and matching criteria, only 2 features (recent antibiotics and previous hospitalization) achieved statistical significance as detectable risk factors in our population. Regardless, these data, coupled with increasing prevalence of UTI with ESBL‐producing bacteria, provide justification and advocacy for the empiric use of ESBL active antibiotics (ie, carbapenems) in certain high‐risk individuals, particularly those patients with a previous history of ESBL or those with multiple risk factors identified in our study as well as others (previous hospitalization, recent antibiotic exposure). Importantly, an aggressive de‐escalation strategy should be used to temper collateral damage for patients with non‐ESBL infections. Moreover, the utilization of oral therapies beyond the fluoroquinolones and trimethoprim‐sulfamethoxazole, such as fosfomycin and nitrofurantoin, coupled with coordinated transitions of care, may alleviate the demand for intravenous access in patients prepared for discharge.[35, 36]

This study is not without limitations. As only a distinct period in time was studied, we are unable to determine the implications of previous episodes of UTI on the current admission. Although the Charlson comorbidity score was not significantly different between the 2 patient cohorts, ESBL‐EK patients were more likely to have several demographic features (ie, diabetes mellitus, recurrent UTIs, previous hospitalization, and recent antibiotic exposure), which are to be expected in the ESBL population.[37, 38] Although these differences have been observed as expected, we believe the driver of prolonged LOS and increased costs of care stem from inappropriate initial antibiotic therapy as evident by the initial clinical failure observed in ESBL‐EK patients. It should also be noted that we defined antibiotics as appropriate based on the laboratory criteria for susceptibility, as such agents that have high concentration in the urinary tract (ie, fluoroquinolones) may be effective despite these laboratory definitions.[17] For instance, 10 of our ESBL‐EK patients never received appropriate antibiotics (3 fluoroquinolones, 7 noncarbapenem ‐lactams) as defined by laboratory‐based susceptibility testing, 8 of whom experienced clinical success. Previous studies have shown discordance between phenotypic ESBL‐related resistance profiles and outcomes.[17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 25, 39, 40]

In summary, recent increases in antimicrobial resistance present ongoing challenges in the treatment of hospitalized patients, as appropriate treatment options are extremely limited. Our findings strengthen the consortium of data stating that antimicrobial resistance unfavorably impacts patient outcomes.[41, 42] ESBL‐EK in UTI is associated with high rates of failure of initial antibiotic therapy, prolonged LOS, and increased cost of care. Furthermore, the added cost associated with UTI due to ESBL‐EK is not recognized in hospital reimbursement, as evident by a $3200 net loss relative to reimbursement. This loss appears to be solely due to the increased LOS, as antibiotic costs were <1% of cost of care. Moreover, these negative consequences could be even more pronounced at institutions with a higher prevalence of ESBL infection. A multidisciplinary approach (infection control, microbiology) using these data as a benchmark, may enhance the detection, treatment, and prevention of these ESBL‐producing organisms. With high levels of coresistance to noncarbapenem ‐lactams and fluoroquinolones, providers should be cognizant of organisms capable of producing ESBL when selecting initial antibiotic therapy in high‐risk populations. Early recognition and timely initiation of appropriate antibiotic therapy appear paramount to minimizing the burden of ESBL‐EK in patients admitted to the hospital with a UTI.

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Gilbert Fotunato for his assistance with administrative data retrieval.

Disclosures

This work is supported by a grant from Merck & Co., Inc. D.P.N. reports having received grant support and honorarium from Merck & Co., Inc. S.H.M and L.O.T report no conflicts of interest relevant to this article.

References
  1. Litwin MS, Saigal CS, Yano EM, et al. Urologic diseases in America project: analytical methods and principal findings. J Urol. 2005;173(3):933937.
  2. Nicolle LE. Urinary tract pathogens in complicated infection and in elderly individuals. J Infect Dis. 2001;183(suppl 1):S5S8.
  3. Hoban DJ, Nicolle LE, Hawser S, Bouchillon S, Badal R. Antimicrobial susceptibility of global inpatient urinary tract isolates of Escherichia coli: results from the Study for Monitoring Antimicrobial Resistance Trends (SMART) program: 2009–2010. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2011;70(4):507511.
  4. Paterson DL, Bonomo RA. Extended‐spectrum β‐lactamases: a clinical update. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2005;18(4):657686.
  5. Oteo J, Perez‐Vazquez M, Campos J. Extended‐spectrum β‐lactamase producing Escherichia coli: changing epidemiology and clinical impact. Curr Opin Infect Dis. 2010;23(4):320326.
  6. Livermore DM. Defining an extended‐spectrum beta‐lactamase. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2008;14(suppl 5):310.
  7. Reinert RR, Low DE, Rossi F, Zhang X, Wattal C, Dowzicky MJ. Antimicrobial susceptibility among organisms from the Asia/Pacific Rim, Europe and Latin and North America collected as part of TEST and the in vitro activity of tigecycline. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2007;60(5):10181029.
  8. Winokur PL, Canton R, Casellas JM, Legakis N. Variations in the prevalence of strains expressing an extended‐spectrum β‐lactamase phenotype and characterization of isolates from Europe, the Americas, and the Western Pacific region. Clin Infect Dis. 2001;32(suppl 2):S94S103.
  9. National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance (NNIS) System Report, data summary from January 1992 through June 2004. Am J Infect Control. 2004;32(8):470485.
  10. Goossens H, Grabein B. Prevalence and antimicrobial susceptibility data for extended‐spectrum β‐lactamase‐ and AmpC‐producing Enterobacteriaceae from the MYSTIC Program in Europe and the United States (1997–2004). Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2005;53(4):257264.
  11. Pitout JDD, Nordmann P, Laupland KB, Poirel L. Emergence of Enterobacteriaceae producing extended‐spectrum b‐lactamases (ESBLs) in the community. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2005;56(1):5259.
  12. Paterson DL, Mulazimoglu L, Casellas JM, et al. Epidemiology of ciprofloxacin resistance and its relationship to extended‐spectrum B‐lactamase production in Klebsiella pneumoniae isolates causing bacteremia. Clin Infect Dis. 2000;30(4):473478.
  13. Lautenbach E, Strom BL, Bilker WB, Patel JB, Edelstein PH, Fishman NO. Epidemiological investigation of fluoroquinolone resistance in infections due to extended‐spectrum‐β‐lactamase‐producing Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae. Clin Infect Dis. 2001;33(8):12881294.
  14. Schwaber MJ, Navon‐Venezia S, Schwartz D, Carmeli Y. High levels of antimicrobial coresistance among extended‐spectrum‐β‐lactamase‐producing Enterobacteriaceae. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2005;49(5):21372139.
  15. Kollef MH. Inadequate antimicrobial treatment: an important determinant of outcome for hospitalized patients. Clin Infect Dis. 2000;31(suppl 4):S131S138.
  16. Cosgrove SE. The relationship between antimicrobial resistance and patient outcomes: mortality, length of hospital stay, and health care costs. Clin Infect Dis. 2006;42(suppl 2):S82S89.
  17. Lautenbach E, Strom BL, Bilker WB, Patel JB, Edelstein PH, Fishman NO. Extended‐spectrum beta‐lactamase‐producing Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae: risk factors for infection and impact of resistance on outcomes. Clin Infect Dis. 2001:32(8):11621171.
  18. Tumbarello M, Sanguinetti M, Montuori E, et al. Predictors of mortality in patients with bloodstream infections caused by extended‐spectrum‐β‐lactamase‐producing Enterobacteriaceae: importance of inadequate initial antimicrobial treatment. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2007;51(6):19871994.
  19. Schwaber M, Carmeli Y. Mortality and delay in effective therapy associated with extended‐spectrum β lactamase production in Enterobacteriaceae bacteraemia: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2007;60(5):913920.
  20. Tumbarello M, Spanu T, Di Bidino R, et al. Costs of bloodstream infections caused by Escherichia coli and influence of extended‐spectrum‐β‐lactamase production and inadequate initial antibiotic therapy. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2010;54(10):40854091.
  21. Rottier WC, Ammerlann HSM, Bonten MJM. Effects of confounders and intermediates on the association of bacteraemia caused by extended‐spectrum β‐lactamase‐producing Enterobacteriaceae and patient outcome: a meta‐analysis. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2012;67(6):13111320.
  22. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing: 21st informational supplement. M100‐S20. Wayne, PA: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute; 2010.
  23. Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, MacKenzie CR. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis. 1987;40(5):373383.
  24. Kang C, Kim S, Park W, et al. Bloodstream infections caused by antibiotic‐resistant gram‐negative bacilli: risk factors for mortality and impact of inappropriate initial antimicrobial therapy on outcome. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2005;49(2):760766.
  25. Kim BN, Woo JH, Kim MN, Ruy J, Kim YS. Clinical implications of extended‐spectrum beta‐lactamase‐producing Klebsiella pneumoniae bacteraemia. J Hosp Infect. 2002;52(2):99106.
  26. Lee SY, Kotapati S, Kuti JL, Nightingale CH, Nicolau DP. Impact of extended‐spectrum β‐lactamase‐producing Escherichia coli and Klebsiella species on clinical outcomes and hospital costs: a matched cohort study. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2006;27(11):12261232.
  27. Calbo E, Romani V, Xercavins M, et al. Risk factors for community‐onset urinary tract infections due to Escherichia coli harbouring extended‐spectrum‐β‐lactamases. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2006:57(4):780783.
  28. Rodriguez‐Bano J, Alcala JC, Cisneros JM, et al. Community infections caused extended‐spectrum‐β‐lactamase‐producing Escherichia coli. Arch Intern Med. 2008;168(17):18971902.
  29. Lee DS, Lee CB, Lee SJ. Prevalence and risk factors for extended spectrum‐β‐lactamase‐producing uropathogens in urinary tract infection. Korean J Urol. 2010;51(7):492497.
  30. Meier S, Weber R, Zbinden R, Ruef C, Hasse B. Extended‐spectrum β‐lactamase‐producing gram‐negative pathogens in community‐acquired urinary tract infections: an increasing challenge for antimicrobial therapy. Infection. 2011;39(4):333340.
  31. Tinelli M, Cataldo MA, Mantengoli E, et al. Epidemiology and genetic characteristics of extended‐spectrum‐β‐lactamase‐producing gram‐negative bacteria causing urinary tract infections in long‐term care facilities. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2012;67(12):29822987.
  32. Briongos‐Figuero LS, Gomez‐Traveso T, Bachiller‐Luque P, et al. Epidemiology, risk factors and comorbidity for urinary tract infections caused by extended‐spectrum beta‐lactamase (ESBL)‐producing enterobacteria. Int J Clin Pract. 2012;66(9):891896.
  33. Tumbarello M, Trecarichi EM, Bassetti M, et al. Identifying patients harboring extended‐spectrum‐β‐lactamase‐producing Enterobacteriaceae on hospital admission: derivation and validation of a scoring system. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2011;55(7):34853490.
  34. Johnson SW, Anderson DJ, May DB, Drew RH. Utility of a clinical risk factor scoring model in predicting infection with extended‐spectrum‐β‐lactamase‐producing Enterobacteriaceae on hospital admission. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2013;34(4):385392.
  35. Pullukcu H, Tasbakan M, Siphai OR, Yamazhan T, Aydemir S, Ulusoy S. Fosfomycin in the treatment of extended spectrum beta‐lactamase‐producing Escherichia coli‐related lower urinary tract infections. Int J Amtimicrob Agents. 2007;29(1):6265.
  36. Tasbakan MI, Pullukcu H, Sipahi OR, Yamazhan T, Ulusoy . Nitrofurantoin in the treatment of extended‐spectrum beta‐lactamase‐producing Escherichia coli‐related lower urinary tract infection. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2012;40:554556.
  37. Rodriguez‐Bano J, Navarro MD, Romero L, et al. Epidemiology and clinical features of infections caused by extended‐spectrum beta‐lactamase‐producing Escherichia coli in nonhospitalized patients. J Clin Microb. 2004;42(3):10891094.
  38. Rodriguez‐Bano J, Alcala JC, Cisneros JM, et al. Community infections caused by extended‐spectrum β‐lactamase‐producing Escherichia coli. Arch Intern Med. 2008:168(17):18971902.
  39. Du B, Long Y, Liu H, et al. Extended‐spectrum beta‐lactamase‐producing Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae bloodstream infection: risk factors and clinical outcome. Intensive Care Med. 2002;28(12):17181723.
  40. Schiappa DA, Hayden MK, Matushek MG, et al. Ceftazidime‐resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae and Escherichia coli bloodstream infection: a case‐control and molecular epidemiologic investigation. J Infect Dis. 1996;174(3):529536.
  41. Cosgrove SE, Carmel Y. The impact of antimicrobial resistance on health and economic outcomes. Clin Infect Dis. 2003;36(11):14331437.
  42. MacGowan AP. Clinical implications of antimicrobial resistance for therapy. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2008;62(suppl 2):ii105ii114.
References
  1. Litwin MS, Saigal CS, Yano EM, et al. Urologic diseases in America project: analytical methods and principal findings. J Urol. 2005;173(3):933937.
  2. Nicolle LE. Urinary tract pathogens in complicated infection and in elderly individuals. J Infect Dis. 2001;183(suppl 1):S5S8.
  3. Hoban DJ, Nicolle LE, Hawser S, Bouchillon S, Badal R. Antimicrobial susceptibility of global inpatient urinary tract isolates of Escherichia coli: results from the Study for Monitoring Antimicrobial Resistance Trends (SMART) program: 2009–2010. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2011;70(4):507511.
  4. Paterson DL, Bonomo RA. Extended‐spectrum β‐lactamases: a clinical update. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2005;18(4):657686.
  5. Oteo J, Perez‐Vazquez M, Campos J. Extended‐spectrum β‐lactamase producing Escherichia coli: changing epidemiology and clinical impact. Curr Opin Infect Dis. 2010;23(4):320326.
  6. Livermore DM. Defining an extended‐spectrum beta‐lactamase. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2008;14(suppl 5):310.
  7. Reinert RR, Low DE, Rossi F, Zhang X, Wattal C, Dowzicky MJ. Antimicrobial susceptibility among organisms from the Asia/Pacific Rim, Europe and Latin and North America collected as part of TEST and the in vitro activity of tigecycline. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2007;60(5):10181029.
  8. Winokur PL, Canton R, Casellas JM, Legakis N. Variations in the prevalence of strains expressing an extended‐spectrum β‐lactamase phenotype and characterization of isolates from Europe, the Americas, and the Western Pacific region. Clin Infect Dis. 2001;32(suppl 2):S94S103.
  9. National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance (NNIS) System Report, data summary from January 1992 through June 2004. Am J Infect Control. 2004;32(8):470485.
  10. Goossens H, Grabein B. Prevalence and antimicrobial susceptibility data for extended‐spectrum β‐lactamase‐ and AmpC‐producing Enterobacteriaceae from the MYSTIC Program in Europe and the United States (1997–2004). Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2005;53(4):257264.
  11. Pitout JDD, Nordmann P, Laupland KB, Poirel L. Emergence of Enterobacteriaceae producing extended‐spectrum b‐lactamases (ESBLs) in the community. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2005;56(1):5259.
  12. Paterson DL, Mulazimoglu L, Casellas JM, et al. Epidemiology of ciprofloxacin resistance and its relationship to extended‐spectrum B‐lactamase production in Klebsiella pneumoniae isolates causing bacteremia. Clin Infect Dis. 2000;30(4):473478.
  13. Lautenbach E, Strom BL, Bilker WB, Patel JB, Edelstein PH, Fishman NO. Epidemiological investigation of fluoroquinolone resistance in infections due to extended‐spectrum‐β‐lactamase‐producing Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae. Clin Infect Dis. 2001;33(8):12881294.
  14. Schwaber MJ, Navon‐Venezia S, Schwartz D, Carmeli Y. High levels of antimicrobial coresistance among extended‐spectrum‐β‐lactamase‐producing Enterobacteriaceae. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2005;49(5):21372139.
  15. Kollef MH. Inadequate antimicrobial treatment: an important determinant of outcome for hospitalized patients. Clin Infect Dis. 2000;31(suppl 4):S131S138.
  16. Cosgrove SE. The relationship between antimicrobial resistance and patient outcomes: mortality, length of hospital stay, and health care costs. Clin Infect Dis. 2006;42(suppl 2):S82S89.
  17. Lautenbach E, Strom BL, Bilker WB, Patel JB, Edelstein PH, Fishman NO. Extended‐spectrum beta‐lactamase‐producing Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae: risk factors for infection and impact of resistance on outcomes. Clin Infect Dis. 2001:32(8):11621171.
  18. Tumbarello M, Sanguinetti M, Montuori E, et al. Predictors of mortality in patients with bloodstream infections caused by extended‐spectrum‐β‐lactamase‐producing Enterobacteriaceae: importance of inadequate initial antimicrobial treatment. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2007;51(6):19871994.
  19. Schwaber M, Carmeli Y. Mortality and delay in effective therapy associated with extended‐spectrum β lactamase production in Enterobacteriaceae bacteraemia: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2007;60(5):913920.
  20. Tumbarello M, Spanu T, Di Bidino R, et al. Costs of bloodstream infections caused by Escherichia coli and influence of extended‐spectrum‐β‐lactamase production and inadequate initial antibiotic therapy. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2010;54(10):40854091.
  21. Rottier WC, Ammerlann HSM, Bonten MJM. Effects of confounders and intermediates on the association of bacteraemia caused by extended‐spectrum β‐lactamase‐producing Enterobacteriaceae and patient outcome: a meta‐analysis. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2012;67(6):13111320.
  22. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing: 21st informational supplement. M100‐S20. Wayne, PA: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute; 2010.
  23. Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, MacKenzie CR. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis. 1987;40(5):373383.
  24. Kang C, Kim S, Park W, et al. Bloodstream infections caused by antibiotic‐resistant gram‐negative bacilli: risk factors for mortality and impact of inappropriate initial antimicrobial therapy on outcome. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2005;49(2):760766.
  25. Kim BN, Woo JH, Kim MN, Ruy J, Kim YS. Clinical implications of extended‐spectrum beta‐lactamase‐producing Klebsiella pneumoniae bacteraemia. J Hosp Infect. 2002;52(2):99106.
  26. Lee SY, Kotapati S, Kuti JL, Nightingale CH, Nicolau DP. Impact of extended‐spectrum β‐lactamase‐producing Escherichia coli and Klebsiella species on clinical outcomes and hospital costs: a matched cohort study. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2006;27(11):12261232.
  27. Calbo E, Romani V, Xercavins M, et al. Risk factors for community‐onset urinary tract infections due to Escherichia coli harbouring extended‐spectrum‐β‐lactamases. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2006:57(4):780783.
  28. Rodriguez‐Bano J, Alcala JC, Cisneros JM, et al. Community infections caused extended‐spectrum‐β‐lactamase‐producing Escherichia coli. Arch Intern Med. 2008;168(17):18971902.
  29. Lee DS, Lee CB, Lee SJ. Prevalence and risk factors for extended spectrum‐β‐lactamase‐producing uropathogens in urinary tract infection. Korean J Urol. 2010;51(7):492497.
  30. Meier S, Weber R, Zbinden R, Ruef C, Hasse B. Extended‐spectrum β‐lactamase‐producing gram‐negative pathogens in community‐acquired urinary tract infections: an increasing challenge for antimicrobial therapy. Infection. 2011;39(4):333340.
  31. Tinelli M, Cataldo MA, Mantengoli E, et al. Epidemiology and genetic characteristics of extended‐spectrum‐β‐lactamase‐producing gram‐negative bacteria causing urinary tract infections in long‐term care facilities. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2012;67(12):29822987.
  32. Briongos‐Figuero LS, Gomez‐Traveso T, Bachiller‐Luque P, et al. Epidemiology, risk factors and comorbidity for urinary tract infections caused by extended‐spectrum beta‐lactamase (ESBL)‐producing enterobacteria. Int J Clin Pract. 2012;66(9):891896.
  33. Tumbarello M, Trecarichi EM, Bassetti M, et al. Identifying patients harboring extended‐spectrum‐β‐lactamase‐producing Enterobacteriaceae on hospital admission: derivation and validation of a scoring system. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2011;55(7):34853490.
  34. Johnson SW, Anderson DJ, May DB, Drew RH. Utility of a clinical risk factor scoring model in predicting infection with extended‐spectrum‐β‐lactamase‐producing Enterobacteriaceae on hospital admission. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2013;34(4):385392.
  35. Pullukcu H, Tasbakan M, Siphai OR, Yamazhan T, Aydemir S, Ulusoy S. Fosfomycin in the treatment of extended spectrum beta‐lactamase‐producing Escherichia coli‐related lower urinary tract infections. Int J Amtimicrob Agents. 2007;29(1):6265.
  36. Tasbakan MI, Pullukcu H, Sipahi OR, Yamazhan T, Ulusoy . Nitrofurantoin in the treatment of extended‐spectrum beta‐lactamase‐producing Escherichia coli‐related lower urinary tract infection. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2012;40:554556.
  37. Rodriguez‐Bano J, Navarro MD, Romero L, et al. Epidemiology and clinical features of infections caused by extended‐spectrum beta‐lactamase‐producing Escherichia coli in nonhospitalized patients. J Clin Microb. 2004;42(3):10891094.
  38. Rodriguez‐Bano J, Alcala JC, Cisneros JM, et al. Community infections caused by extended‐spectrum β‐lactamase‐producing Escherichia coli. Arch Intern Med. 2008:168(17):18971902.
  39. Du B, Long Y, Liu H, et al. Extended‐spectrum beta‐lactamase‐producing Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae bloodstream infection: risk factors and clinical outcome. Intensive Care Med. 2002;28(12):17181723.
  40. Schiappa DA, Hayden MK, Matushek MG, et al. Ceftazidime‐resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae and Escherichia coli bloodstream infection: a case‐control and molecular epidemiologic investigation. J Infect Dis. 1996;174(3):529536.
  41. Cosgrove SE, Carmel Y. The impact of antimicrobial resistance on health and economic outcomes. Clin Infect Dis. 2003;36(11):14331437.
  42. MacGowan AP. Clinical implications of antimicrobial resistance for therapy. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2008;62(suppl 2):ii105ii114.
Issue
Journal of Hospital Medicine - 9(4)
Issue
Journal of Hospital Medicine - 9(4)
Page Number
232-238
Page Number
232-238
Article Type
Display Headline
Impact of extended‐spectrum β‐lactamase–producing organisms on clinical and economic outcomes in patients with urinary tract infection
Display Headline
Impact of extended‐spectrum β‐lactamase–producing organisms on clinical and economic outcomes in patients with urinary tract infection
Sections
Article Source

© 2014 Society of Hospital Medicine

Disallow All Ads
Correspondence Location
Address for correspondence and reprint requests: David P. Nicolau, PharmD, Center for Anti‐Infective Research and Development, Hartford Hospital, 80 Seymour Street, Hartford, CT 06102; Telephone: 860‐545‐3941; Fax: 860‐545‐3992; E‐mail: [email protected]
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Article PDF Media
Media Files

Thromboprophylaxis in Patients with HIV

Article Type
Changed
Sun, 05/21/2017 - 14:27
Display Headline
Nonadministration of thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized patients with HIV: A missed opportunity for prevention?

Patients with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) are at a 2‐ to 10‐fold greater risk for venous thromboembolism (VTE) compared with the general population.[1] Although antiphospholipid antibodies and protein S deficiency have often been cited as reasons for the thrombophilia associated with HIV, previous studies have also documented an increased risk of VTE with declining CD4+ cell count.[2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8] Worsening immune function places HIV patients at increased risk for opportunistic and nonopportunistic infections and malignancies, all independently associated with an increased risk of VTE.[5, 9, 10, 11, 12] Although increasing use of antiretroviral therapy has greatly decreased these sequelae, these complications of HIV infection are associated with an increased frequency of hospitalization.[13, 14, 15, 16] HIV infection and associated inflammation has been implicated in cardiovascular conditions such as cardiomyopathy, pulmonary hypertension, and myocardial infarction.[17, 18] Additionally, progression of HIV infection appears to influence T‐cell activation and differentiation in a manner that leads to early immunosenescence in infected individuals.[19, 20]

VTE prophylaxis is effective.[21] Virtually all efforts to decrease VTE have been focused on improving the prescription of prophylaxis with varying degrees of success.[22] These interventions have been employed with the tacit assumption that medication prescribed for inpatients will always be administered. However, at our institution, recent research has demonstrated that a significant proportion of prescribed thromboprophylaxis doses are not administered to hospitalized patients.[23] Refusal by the patient or a family member was the most commonly documented reason for dose nonadministration. In addition, the rate of thromboprophylaxis nonadministration varied greatly between nursing units with distinct patient populations. We hypothesized that nonadministration of VTE prophylaxis may be more common in patients with HIV, and this phenomenon may contribute to their increased risk for VTE.

The purpose of this study was to determine if the proportion of nonadministered thromboprophylaxis is greater among hospitalized patients with HIV and to characterize documented reasons for dose nonadministration.

METHODS

This study was conducted at The Johns Hopkins Hospital (JHH), a large, urban, academic medical center in Baltimore, Maryland. This single‐center retrospective cohort study utilized an existing dataset containing dose administration data extracted from an electronic medication administration record (eMAR). This dataset included information for all prescribed doses of thromboprophylaxis (heparin 5000 U subcutaneously every 8 or 12 hours, heparin 7500 U subcutaneously every 12 hours, enoxaparin 30 mg subcutaneously every 12 hours, or enoxaparin 40 mg subcutaneously daily) for patients hospitalized on medicine units at JHH from November 2007 to December 2008. This time period follows the implementation of an electronic order set for VTE prophylaxis.[24, 25] Data available for each dose included drug name, dose, frequency, patient demographics, and whether or not the dose was administered. Each dose not administered included a reason for nonadministration, which was chosen from a dropdown menu of responses on the eMAR by the nurse at the time the dose was due. A separate electronic report was obtained from an internal administrative database, which identified all patients within the dose administration dataset who had the International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision code 042 (HIV diagnosis). A report identifying patient history numbers with matching diagnostic code for HIV was appended to the dose administration dataset using a relational database (Microsoft Access; Microsoft Corp., Redmond, WA) prior to analysis. The dose administration data were obtained previously for a separate analysis.[23] Approval for this study was granted from the institutional review board of Johns Hopkins Medicine.

Our analytic plan included comparisons between patients with and without HIV on a dose, patient, and unit level. As JHH operates a nursing unit dedicated to the inpatient care of patients with HIV, we included analyses of dose characteristics between this unit and other medicine units. It should be noted that patients without a diagnosis of HIV are sometimes cared for on this unit. Therefore, the electronic medical record for each patient without the diagnosis code for HIV hospitalized on this unit was reviewed to determine HIV status. An analysis was performed comparing visit identification numbers with diagnosis codes to identify potential seroconversions during the study period. Although we planned to compare nonadministration and documented refusal of doses on the unit level, a lack of patients with HIV on a number of units limited our ability to perform these analyses.

Statistical Analysis

The percent of doses not administered was calculated as the number of doses not administered divided by the number of doses prescribed. Likewise, the percent of prescribed doses documented as refused was calculated as the number of prescribed doses documented as refused divided by the number of doses prescribed. For each comparison, an odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was reported. Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were performed to assess the relationship between patient factors and dose nonadministration and documented refusal, respectively. Generalized estimating equations (GEE) using a logit link and an exchangeable correlation structure were used in these analyses. The GEE technique was used to account for within‐individual correlation of administration and documented refusal status.

Categorical data were compared using the two‐sided [2] test. Parametric and nonparametric continuous data were compared using the Student t test and Mann‐Whitney U test, respectively. A P value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant for all analyses. Analyses were performed using Minitab 15 (Minitab Inc., State College, PA) and Stata (StataCorp, College Station, TX).

RESULTS

During the 8‐month study period, 42,870 doses of thromboprophylaxis were prescribed during 4947 patient admissions to 13 individual medicine units. Overall, the diagnosis code for HIV was present in 12% of patient visits. The proportion of nonadministered doses per unit ranged from 6% to 27%, whereas the number of doses prescribed per unit ranged from 34 to 7301.

Patient characteristics were described on the visit level (Table 1). Patients with HIV were significantly younger, more often male and black, and had a longer length of stay compared with patients without HIV. Patients hospitalized on the HIV care unit had similar characteristics to the overall population of patients with HIV. It should be noted that not all patients cared for on this unit had a diagnosis of HIV, as patients from other medicine services are sometimes cared for in this location.

Visit Characteristics
 Patients Without HIVPatients With HIVP
  • NOTE: Abbreviations: HIV, human immunodeficiency virus; IQR, interquartile range; N/A, not applicable; SD, standard deviation.

Visits, n4,364583N/A
Male, n (%)2,039 (47)370 (64)<0.001
Mean ageSD, y5618469<0.001
Race, n (%)   
African American2,603 (60)522 (90)<0.001
Caucasian1,610 (37)53 (9)<0.001
Asian, Pacific Islander, other151 (4)8 (1)0.006
Median length of stay (IQR), d3 (15)4 (27)0.002
Marital status, n (%)   
Single2,051 (47)471 (81)<0.001
Married1,405 (32)71 (12)<0.001
Widowed486 (11)10 (1)<0.001
Divorced402 (9)28 (5)<0.001
Separated33 (1)3 (1)0.607
Unknown5 (0)0 (0)0.465
Payor, n (%)   
Medicare1,771 (41)133 (23)<0.001
Medicaid1,343 (31)392 (67)<0.001
Commercial1,181 (27)43 (7)<0.001
Other including self‐pay69 (1)15 (3)0.087

Overall, 17% of prescribed prophylaxis doses were not administered. A greater proportion of prescribed doses were not administered to patients with HIV compared with patients without HIV (23.5% vs 16.1%, OR: 1.59, 95% CI: 1.49‐1.70, P<0.001) (Table 2). Using a GEE and univariate regression, HIV diagnosis was associated with nonadministration of doses (OR: 1.37, 95% CI: 1.17‐1.60, P<0.001) (Table 3). Race, age, length of stay, and drug (heparin vs enoxaparin) were each associated with nonadministration. There was no significant association between nonadministration and sex, marital status, or payor. When stratified by nursing unit, there was substantial variation in the proportion of nonadministered doses between units. Within each unit, the proportion of doses not administered varied when stratified by HIV status. For example, on unit A, the proportion of doses not administered was greater for patients with HIV compared with patients without HIV (33.3% vs 12.9%, OR: 3.38, 95% CI: 2.61 to 4.37, P<0.001) (Figure 1). However, on unit K, the proportion of doses not administered to patients with HIV was 2‐fold less than in patients without HIV (7.2% vs 14.3%, OR: 0.47, 95% CI: 0.30‐0.74, P<0.001). Unit‐level analysis was not possible in regression models due to drastic imbalance in the prevalence of HIV across units. When comparing doses prescribed in the HIV care unit to all other medicine units, the proportion not administered (23.9% vs 16.3%, OR: 1.61, 95% CI: 1.49‐1.73, P<0.001) closely resembled the values seen when comparing patients with and without HIV hospital wide (23.5% vs 16.1%). However, when doses on the HIV care unit were stratified by HIV status, the doses not administered were 2‐fold greater, as a proportion, for patients with HIV compared with those without HIV (26.4% vs 13.1%, OR: 2.39, 95% CI: 1.93‐2.96, P<0.001).

Doses Prescribed, Not Administered, and Documented as Refused
 Doses PrescribedDoses Not Administered (% of Doses Prescribed)Doses Documented as Refused (% of All Doses Prescribed)
  • NOTE: Abbreviations: HIV, human immunodeficiency.

  • P<0.001.

  • P=0.006.

All patients with HIV5,6811,334 (23.5%)a935 (16.5%)a
All patients without HIV37,1896,005 (16.1%)3,935 (10.6%)
HIV care unit4,4521,063 (23.9%)a709 (15.9%)a
All other units38,4186,276 (16.3%)4,161 (10.8%)
HIV care unit: patients with HIV3,602952 (26.4%)a651 (18.1%)a
HIV care unit: patients without HIV850111 (13.1%)58 (6.8%)
All other units: patients with HIV2,079382 (18.4%)b284 (13.7%)a
All other units: patients without HIV36,3395,894 (16.2%)3,877 (10.7%)
Univariate Regression Analysis for Dose Nonadministration and Documented Refusal
 Nonadministered, n (%)PDocumented as Refused, n (%)P
  • NOTE: Abbreviations: HIV, human immunodeficiency.

Race 0.001 0.072
African American2,601 (17.8) 1,708 (11.7) 
Caucasian4,379 (16.4) 2,922 (10.9) 
Asian, Pacific Islander, other359 (23.4) 240 (15.6) 
HIV status <0.001 0.002
Negative6,005 (16.2) 3,935 (10.6) 
Positive1,344 (23.5) 935 (16.5) 
Age, y <0.001 <0.001
1959 (20.6) 44 (15.3) 
20291,260 (33.8) 1,000 (26.8) 
30391,088 (28.1) 845 (21.8) 
40491,628 (21.0) 1,104 (14.2) 
50591,493 (16.1) 953 (10.3) 
6069900 (12.6) 515 (7.2) 
7079571 (9.6) 250 (4.2) 
8089252 (6.2) 95 (2.3) 
9088 (11.5) 84 (8.4) 
Sex 0.372 0.919
Male3,689 (17.3) 2,392 (11.2) 
Female3,650 (17.0) 2,478 (11.5) 
Drug <0.001 <0.001
Heparin6,833 (18.4) 4,515 (12.2) 
Enoxaparin506 (8.9) 355 (6.2) 
Length of stay, d <0.001 <0.001
01446 (24.3) 282 (15.4) 
231,463 (19.4) 971 (12.9) 
472,332 (18.9) 1,620 (13.1) 
83,098 (14.6) 1,997 (9.4) 
Figure 1
Proportion of prescribed doses not administered by unit and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) status

The results of the multivariate regression analyses with GEE are displayed in Table 4. HIV diagnosis, non‐African American race, and heparin (as compared with enoxaparin) were associated with increased likelihood of nonadministration. Increasing age and increasing length of stay were associated with decreased likelihood of nonadministration by a small but significant amount.

Multivariate Regression Analysis for Dose Nonadministration and Documented Refusal
 OR of Nonadministration95% CI, POR of Documented Refusal95% CI, P
  • NOTE: Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; OR, odds ratio.

Race    
African American1.00Reference1.00Reference
Caucasian1.621.44‐1.81, <0.0011.531.32‐1.77, <0.001
Asian, Pacific Islander, Other1.541.19‐2.00, 0.0011.481.07‐2.01, 0.019
HIV status    
Negative1.00Reference1.00Reference
Positive1.211.001.45, 0.0391.291.06‐1.56, 0.012
Age, per year0.970.97‐0.98, <0.0010.970.96‐0.97, <0.001
Drug    
Heparin1.00Reference1.00Reference
Enoxaparin0.450.40‐0.51, <0.0010.530.47‐0.61, <0.001
Length of stay, per day0.9910.987‐0.995, <0.0010.9890.983‐0.993, <0.001

The most commonly documented reason for nonadministration was refusal by the patient or family member (66% of all doses not administered). The second most common reason, patient condition not appropriate, accounted for an additional 10% of doses. Across all nursing units, the proportion of prescribed doses that were documented as refused was significantly greater for patients with HIV compared with patients without HIV (16.5% vs 10.6%, OR: 1.66, 95% CI: 1.54‐1.80, P<0.0001) (Table 2). Using the GEE and multivariate regression, HIV diagnosis, non‐African American race, and heparin were associated with increased risk of documented dose refusal. Age and length of stay were inversely related to the likelihood of documented dose refusal. When all administered doses were excluded from the analysis, the association between these variables and documented dose refusal were not as strong. Age and length of stay remained significantly inversely related; however, the other factors were no longer significantly positively associated with documented dose refusal.

Within the HIV care unit, the proportion of prescribed doses documented as refused was greater for patients with HIV compared with patients without HIV (18.1% vs 6.8%, OR: 3.01, 95% CI: 2.28‐3.99, P<0.0001). For all other medicine units, the proportion of nonadministered doses documented as refused was also greater for patients with HIV compared with patients without HIV (13.7% vs 10.7%, OR: 1.32, 95% CI: 1.16‐1.51, P<0.0001).

DISCUSSION

We have identified that nonadministration of thromboprophylaxis was more common among patients with HIV at our institution. Substantial variation in the proportion of doses not administered existed on the nursing unit level, as well as within each unit when stratified by HIV status. This disparity in dose administration was observed on the HIV care unit as well, as the proportion not administered was about 2‐fold greater for patients with HIV compared with those without HIV. Documented dose refusal appeared to account for the majority of nonadministered doses in our cohort. Our analysis also demonstrated that HIV diagnosis is significantly associated with both dose nonadministration and documented dose refusal at our institution.

Medication refusal is a well‐recognized phenomenon among hospitalized patients. A recent study of medication administration in hospitalized patients in the United Kingdom noted that refusal accounted for about 45% of omitted doses.[26] Fanikos et al. also found that documented refusal of doses contributed significantly to the overall number of VTE prophylaxis doses not administered to patients.[27] In our study, the proportion of nonadministered doses documented as refused by the patient or family member was significantly greater in patients with HIV than in patients without HIV across all units. Interestingly, the difference was greater on the HIV care unit when doses were stratified by HIV status. This observation leads us to hypothesize that specific hospital care environments may influence dose nonadministration and refusal rates among our patient population.

Based on regression analyses, increasing age and length of stay were associated with a decreased likelihood of any particular dose not being administered and with any particular dose being documented as refused. It is important to note that our GEE did not take into account date or time of each dose, and therefore we cannot make conclusions as to the likelihood of dose nonadministration or refusal of doses in relation to each other on a time scale. One cannot assume that a dose due later in a hospital course was more or less likely to be given than a dose due on the first hospital day. Although we did not expect these findings, one can hypothesize that patients who are older or have longer stays may be perceived to have more severe illness, and therefore greater need for prophylaxis, from nursing staff and others involved in their care. The associations were small but significant and warrant future investigation.

To our knowledge, this is the first investigation comparing the proportion of nonadministered doses of thromboprophylaxis between patients with and without HIV. Our data show that nonadministered doses and refused doses of thromboprophylaxis are more frequent among patients with HIV. In addition, we noted that nonadministration was more common on the dedicated HIV care unit compared with other units. We cannot currently offer a clear explanation for the disparity observed between units, and more specifically, within the HIV care unit. However, it is possible that a unique culture of care and provider‐specific factors may contribute.

Our study was limited by a number of factors. Seroconversion among patients during the study period was possible; however, our analysis revealed only 2 instances among nearly 4000 unique patients. A more significant limitation was the level of analysis allowed by the dataset. We examined dose characteristics on a dose and unit level, but the ability to analyze doses based on the prescriber and nurse level may have provided valuable insight into the specific reasons behind the observations presented here. Additionally, the specific unit assigned to a given dose in our dataset represented the discharge location for the corresponding patient, making it possible that some amount of nonadministered doses may be attributed to the incorrect unit. However, we do not believe that unit‐to‐unit transfers would be frequent enough to influence the overall results. In addition, we did not link nonadministration of thromboprophylaxis with VTE events, as these data were not present in the current dataset. Although this is a limitation of the current study, we believe that the notion that missed doses of thromboprophylaxis place patients at higher risk for VTE is plausible, as the efficacy of thromboprophylaxis is well established.[28, 29, 30] It is important to note that the reason for nonadministration selected by the nurse on the eMAR may not always represent the only reason or even the true reason for dose nonadministration. It is possible that dose refusal may be over‐represented in our sample, in part due to inaccurate documentation. Recent investigations at JHH have identified varying attitudes on the part of the patient and the nurse regarding thromboprophylaxis. A questionnaire and interview of patients showed a large knowledge gap regarding thromboprophylaxis, with many individuals unable to explain its role or significance in their medical care.[31] A common theme was also observed in a survey of nurses regarding VTE prophylaxis: doses were sometimes considered optional for reasons such as ambulation status, perceived severity of illness, or reason for hospitalization. Some nurses also reported that after an initial refused dose, they may continue to document subsequent doses as refused, sometimes without offering the dose to the patient.[32] As variation in practice was observed between individual nurses, it is also likely that the culture of care may vary between units, influencing thromboprophylaxis nonadministration rates as well as documentation of doses as refused. The dose‐level data used for the GEE analyses did not include date and time of administration, which limited the ability of the GEE to more completely account for autocorrelation.

To further investigate the findings of this and related studies, we intend to more closely analyze data at multiple levels with the goal of identifying an appropriate and feasible target for intervention. Additionally, further investigation should be performed with the goal of determining the relationship between decreased exposure to thromboprophylaxis and VTE. However, as patients with HIV appear to be at increased risk of VTE, ensuring that thromboprophylaxis is delivered appropriately and consistently should be an important goal for all who provide care to this population.

Files
References
  1. Ahonkhai A, Gebo K, Streiff M, Moore R, Segal J. Venous thromboembolism in patients with HIV/AIDS: a case‐control study. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2008;48(3):310314.
  2. Saif M, Bona R, Greenberg B. AIDS and thrombosis: retrospective study of 131 HIV‐infected patients. AIDS Patient Care STDS. 2001;15(6):311320.
  3. Rasmussen LD, Dybdal M, Gerstoft J, et al. HIV and risk of venous thromboembolism: a Danish nationwide population‐based cohort study. HIV Med. 2011;12(4):202210.
  4. Sullivan PS, Dworkin MS, Jones JL, Hooper WC. Epidemiology of thrombosis in HIV‐infected individuals. The adult/adolescent spectrum of HIV disease project. AIDS. 2000;14(3):321324.
  5. Jacobson MC, Dezube BJ, Aboulafia DM. Thrombotic complications in patients infected with HIV in the era of highly active antiretroviral therapy: a case series. Clin Infect Dis. 2004;39(8):12141222.
  6. Cohen AJ, Philips TM, Kessler CM. Circulating coagulation inhibitors in the acquired immunodeficiency syndrome. Ann Intern Med. 1986;104(2):175180.
  7. Giannakopoulos B, Krilis SA. The pathogenesis of the antiphospholipid syndrome. N Engl J Med. 2013;368(11):10331044.
  8. Erbe M, Rickerts V, Bauersachs RM, Lindhoff‐Last E. Acquired protein C and protein S deficiency in HIV‐infected patients. Clin Appl Thromb Hemost. 2003;9(4):325331.
  9. Labarca JA, Rabaggliati RM, Radrigan FJ, et al. Antiphospholipid syndrome associated with cytomegalovirus infection: case report and review. Clin Infect Dis. 1997;24(2):197200.
  10. Uthman IW, Gharavi AE. Viral infections and antiphospholipid antibodies. Semin Arthritis Rheum. 2002;31(4):256263.
  11. Silverberg MJ, Abrams DI. AIDS‐defining and non‐AIDS‐defining malignancies: cancer occurrence in the antiretroviral therapy era. Curr Opin Oncol. 2007;19(5):446451.
  12. Franchini M, Montagnana M, Targher G, Manzato F, Lippi G. Pathogenesis, clinical and laboratory aspects of thrombosis in cancer. J Thromb Thrombolysis. 2007;24(1):2938.
  13. Betz ME, Gebo KA, Barber E, et al. Patterns of diagnoses in hospital admissions in a multistate cohort of HIV‐positive adults in 2001. Med Care. 2005;43(9 suppl):III3III14.
  14. Bonnet F, Lewden C, May T, et al. Opportunistic infections as causes of death in HIV‐infected patients in the HAART era in France. Scand J Infect Dis. 2005;37(6‐7):482487.
  15. Buchacz K, Baker RK, Moorman AC, et al. Rates of hospitalizations and associated diagnoses in a large multisite cohort of HIV patients in the United States, 1994–2005. AIDS. 2008;22(11):13451354.
  16. Gebo KA, Fleishman JA, Moore RD. Hospitalizations for metabolic conditions, opportunistic infections, and injection drug use among HIV patients: trends between 1996 and 2000 in 12 states. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2005;40(5):609616.
  17. Sudano I, Spieker LE, Noll G, Corti R, Weber R, Luscher T. Cardiovascular disease in HIV infection. Am Heart J. 2006;151:11471155.
  18. Currier JS, Lundgren JD, Carr A, et al. Epidemiological evidence for cardiovascular disease in HIV‐infected patients and relationship to highly active antiretroviral therapy. Circulation. 2008;118(2):e29e35.
  19. Papagno L, Spina C, Marchant A, et al. Immune activation and CD8+ T‐cell differentiation towards senescence in HIV‐1 infection. PLoS Biol. 2004;2(2):E20.
  20. Sousa A, Carneiro J, Meier‐Schellersheim M, Grossman Z, Victorino R. CD4 T cell depletion is linked directly to immune activation in the pathogenesis of HIV‐1 and HIV‐2 but only indirectly to the viral load. J Immunol. 2002;169(6):34003406.
  21. Streiff MB, Lau BD. Thromboprophylaxis in nonsurgical patients. Hematology Am Soc Hematol Educ Program. 2012;2012:631637.
  22. Lau BD, Haut ER. Practices to prevent venous thromboembolism [published online ahead of print May 24, 2013]. BMJ Qual Saf. doi:10.1136/bmjqs‐2012‐001782.
  23. Shermock KM, Lau BD, Haut ER, et al. Patterns of non‐administration of ordered doses of venous thromboembolism prophylaxis: implications for novel intervention strategies. PLoS One. 2013;8(6):e66311.
  24. Streiff MB, Carolan H, Hobson DB, et al. Lessons from The Johns Hopkins multi‐disciplinary venous thromboembolism (VTE) prevention collaborative. BMJ. 2012;344:e3935.
  25. Zeidan AM, Streiff MB, Lau BD, et al. Impact of a venous thromboembolism prophylaxis “smart order set”: improved compliance, fewer events [published online ahead of print April 4, 2013]. Am J Hematol. doi: 10.1002/ajh.23450.
  26. Coleman JJ, McDowell SE, Ferner RE. Dose omissions in hospitalized patients in a UK hospital: an analysis of the relative contribution of adverse drug reactions. Drug Saf. 2012;35(8):677683.
  27. Fanikos J, Stevens LA, Labreche M, et al. Adherence to pharmacological thromboprophylaxis orders in hospitalized patients. Am J Med. 2010;123(6):536541.
  28. Samama MM, Cohen AT, Darmon JY, et al. A comparison of enoxaparin with placebo for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in acutely ill medical patients. Prophylaxis in medical patients with enoxaparin study group. N Engl J Med. 1999;341(11):793800.
  29. Leizorovicz A, Cohen AT, Turpie AG, et al. Randomized, placebo‐controlled trial of dalteparin for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in acutely ill medical patients. Circulation. 2004;110(7):874879.
  30. Cohen AT, Davidson BL, Gallus AS, et al. Efficacy and safety of fondaparinux for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in older acute medical patients: randomised placebo controlled trial. BMJ. 2006;332(7537):325329.
  31. Wong A, Streiff M, Haut E, et al. Patient perspectives on pharmacological venous thromboembolism prophylaxis at The Johns Hopkins Hospital. J Thromb Thrombolysis. 2013;35(3):416.
  32. Elder S, Shermock K, Haut E, et al. Culture of care and documented patient refusal of pharmacologic venous thromboembolism prophylaxis. J Thromb Thrombolysis. 2011;31(3):367400.
Article PDF
Issue
Journal of Hospital Medicine - 9(4)
Page Number
215-220
Sections
Files
Files
Article PDF
Article PDF

Patients with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) are at a 2‐ to 10‐fold greater risk for venous thromboembolism (VTE) compared with the general population.[1] Although antiphospholipid antibodies and protein S deficiency have often been cited as reasons for the thrombophilia associated with HIV, previous studies have also documented an increased risk of VTE with declining CD4+ cell count.[2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8] Worsening immune function places HIV patients at increased risk for opportunistic and nonopportunistic infections and malignancies, all independently associated with an increased risk of VTE.[5, 9, 10, 11, 12] Although increasing use of antiretroviral therapy has greatly decreased these sequelae, these complications of HIV infection are associated with an increased frequency of hospitalization.[13, 14, 15, 16] HIV infection and associated inflammation has been implicated in cardiovascular conditions such as cardiomyopathy, pulmonary hypertension, and myocardial infarction.[17, 18] Additionally, progression of HIV infection appears to influence T‐cell activation and differentiation in a manner that leads to early immunosenescence in infected individuals.[19, 20]

VTE prophylaxis is effective.[21] Virtually all efforts to decrease VTE have been focused on improving the prescription of prophylaxis with varying degrees of success.[22] These interventions have been employed with the tacit assumption that medication prescribed for inpatients will always be administered. However, at our institution, recent research has demonstrated that a significant proportion of prescribed thromboprophylaxis doses are not administered to hospitalized patients.[23] Refusal by the patient or a family member was the most commonly documented reason for dose nonadministration. In addition, the rate of thromboprophylaxis nonadministration varied greatly between nursing units with distinct patient populations. We hypothesized that nonadministration of VTE prophylaxis may be more common in patients with HIV, and this phenomenon may contribute to their increased risk for VTE.

The purpose of this study was to determine if the proportion of nonadministered thromboprophylaxis is greater among hospitalized patients with HIV and to characterize documented reasons for dose nonadministration.

METHODS

This study was conducted at The Johns Hopkins Hospital (JHH), a large, urban, academic medical center in Baltimore, Maryland. This single‐center retrospective cohort study utilized an existing dataset containing dose administration data extracted from an electronic medication administration record (eMAR). This dataset included information for all prescribed doses of thromboprophylaxis (heparin 5000 U subcutaneously every 8 or 12 hours, heparin 7500 U subcutaneously every 12 hours, enoxaparin 30 mg subcutaneously every 12 hours, or enoxaparin 40 mg subcutaneously daily) for patients hospitalized on medicine units at JHH from November 2007 to December 2008. This time period follows the implementation of an electronic order set for VTE prophylaxis.[24, 25] Data available for each dose included drug name, dose, frequency, patient demographics, and whether or not the dose was administered. Each dose not administered included a reason for nonadministration, which was chosen from a dropdown menu of responses on the eMAR by the nurse at the time the dose was due. A separate electronic report was obtained from an internal administrative database, which identified all patients within the dose administration dataset who had the International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision code 042 (HIV diagnosis). A report identifying patient history numbers with matching diagnostic code for HIV was appended to the dose administration dataset using a relational database (Microsoft Access; Microsoft Corp., Redmond, WA) prior to analysis. The dose administration data were obtained previously for a separate analysis.[23] Approval for this study was granted from the institutional review board of Johns Hopkins Medicine.

Our analytic plan included comparisons between patients with and without HIV on a dose, patient, and unit level. As JHH operates a nursing unit dedicated to the inpatient care of patients with HIV, we included analyses of dose characteristics between this unit and other medicine units. It should be noted that patients without a diagnosis of HIV are sometimes cared for on this unit. Therefore, the electronic medical record for each patient without the diagnosis code for HIV hospitalized on this unit was reviewed to determine HIV status. An analysis was performed comparing visit identification numbers with diagnosis codes to identify potential seroconversions during the study period. Although we planned to compare nonadministration and documented refusal of doses on the unit level, a lack of patients with HIV on a number of units limited our ability to perform these analyses.

Statistical Analysis

The percent of doses not administered was calculated as the number of doses not administered divided by the number of doses prescribed. Likewise, the percent of prescribed doses documented as refused was calculated as the number of prescribed doses documented as refused divided by the number of doses prescribed. For each comparison, an odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was reported. Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were performed to assess the relationship between patient factors and dose nonadministration and documented refusal, respectively. Generalized estimating equations (GEE) using a logit link and an exchangeable correlation structure were used in these analyses. The GEE technique was used to account for within‐individual correlation of administration and documented refusal status.

Categorical data were compared using the two‐sided [2] test. Parametric and nonparametric continuous data were compared using the Student t test and Mann‐Whitney U test, respectively. A P value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant for all analyses. Analyses were performed using Minitab 15 (Minitab Inc., State College, PA) and Stata (StataCorp, College Station, TX).

RESULTS

During the 8‐month study period, 42,870 doses of thromboprophylaxis were prescribed during 4947 patient admissions to 13 individual medicine units. Overall, the diagnosis code for HIV was present in 12% of patient visits. The proportion of nonadministered doses per unit ranged from 6% to 27%, whereas the number of doses prescribed per unit ranged from 34 to 7301.

Patient characteristics were described on the visit level (Table 1). Patients with HIV were significantly younger, more often male and black, and had a longer length of stay compared with patients without HIV. Patients hospitalized on the HIV care unit had similar characteristics to the overall population of patients with HIV. It should be noted that not all patients cared for on this unit had a diagnosis of HIV, as patients from other medicine services are sometimes cared for in this location.

Visit Characteristics
 Patients Without HIVPatients With HIVP
  • NOTE: Abbreviations: HIV, human immunodeficiency virus; IQR, interquartile range; N/A, not applicable; SD, standard deviation.

Visits, n4,364583N/A
Male, n (%)2,039 (47)370 (64)<0.001
Mean ageSD, y5618469<0.001
Race, n (%)   
African American2,603 (60)522 (90)<0.001
Caucasian1,610 (37)53 (9)<0.001
Asian, Pacific Islander, other151 (4)8 (1)0.006
Median length of stay (IQR), d3 (15)4 (27)0.002
Marital status, n (%)   
Single2,051 (47)471 (81)<0.001
Married1,405 (32)71 (12)<0.001
Widowed486 (11)10 (1)<0.001
Divorced402 (9)28 (5)<0.001
Separated33 (1)3 (1)0.607
Unknown5 (0)0 (0)0.465
Payor, n (%)   
Medicare1,771 (41)133 (23)<0.001
Medicaid1,343 (31)392 (67)<0.001
Commercial1,181 (27)43 (7)<0.001
Other including self‐pay69 (1)15 (3)0.087

Overall, 17% of prescribed prophylaxis doses were not administered. A greater proportion of prescribed doses were not administered to patients with HIV compared with patients without HIV (23.5% vs 16.1%, OR: 1.59, 95% CI: 1.49‐1.70, P<0.001) (Table 2). Using a GEE and univariate regression, HIV diagnosis was associated with nonadministration of doses (OR: 1.37, 95% CI: 1.17‐1.60, P<0.001) (Table 3). Race, age, length of stay, and drug (heparin vs enoxaparin) were each associated with nonadministration. There was no significant association between nonadministration and sex, marital status, or payor. When stratified by nursing unit, there was substantial variation in the proportion of nonadministered doses between units. Within each unit, the proportion of doses not administered varied when stratified by HIV status. For example, on unit A, the proportion of doses not administered was greater for patients with HIV compared with patients without HIV (33.3% vs 12.9%, OR: 3.38, 95% CI: 2.61 to 4.37, P<0.001) (Figure 1). However, on unit K, the proportion of doses not administered to patients with HIV was 2‐fold less than in patients without HIV (7.2% vs 14.3%, OR: 0.47, 95% CI: 0.30‐0.74, P<0.001). Unit‐level analysis was not possible in regression models due to drastic imbalance in the prevalence of HIV across units. When comparing doses prescribed in the HIV care unit to all other medicine units, the proportion not administered (23.9% vs 16.3%, OR: 1.61, 95% CI: 1.49‐1.73, P<0.001) closely resembled the values seen when comparing patients with and without HIV hospital wide (23.5% vs 16.1%). However, when doses on the HIV care unit were stratified by HIV status, the doses not administered were 2‐fold greater, as a proportion, for patients with HIV compared with those without HIV (26.4% vs 13.1%, OR: 2.39, 95% CI: 1.93‐2.96, P<0.001).

Doses Prescribed, Not Administered, and Documented as Refused
 Doses PrescribedDoses Not Administered (% of Doses Prescribed)Doses Documented as Refused (% of All Doses Prescribed)
  • NOTE: Abbreviations: HIV, human immunodeficiency.

  • P<0.001.

  • P=0.006.

All patients with HIV5,6811,334 (23.5%)a935 (16.5%)a
All patients without HIV37,1896,005 (16.1%)3,935 (10.6%)
HIV care unit4,4521,063 (23.9%)a709 (15.9%)a
All other units38,4186,276 (16.3%)4,161 (10.8%)
HIV care unit: patients with HIV3,602952 (26.4%)a651 (18.1%)a
HIV care unit: patients without HIV850111 (13.1%)58 (6.8%)
All other units: patients with HIV2,079382 (18.4%)b284 (13.7%)a
All other units: patients without HIV36,3395,894 (16.2%)3,877 (10.7%)
Univariate Regression Analysis for Dose Nonadministration and Documented Refusal
 Nonadministered, n (%)PDocumented as Refused, n (%)P
  • NOTE: Abbreviations: HIV, human immunodeficiency.

Race 0.001 0.072
African American2,601 (17.8) 1,708 (11.7) 
Caucasian4,379 (16.4) 2,922 (10.9) 
Asian, Pacific Islander, other359 (23.4) 240 (15.6) 
HIV status <0.001 0.002
Negative6,005 (16.2) 3,935 (10.6) 
Positive1,344 (23.5) 935 (16.5) 
Age, y <0.001 <0.001
1959 (20.6) 44 (15.3) 
20291,260 (33.8) 1,000 (26.8) 
30391,088 (28.1) 845 (21.8) 
40491,628 (21.0) 1,104 (14.2) 
50591,493 (16.1) 953 (10.3) 
6069900 (12.6) 515 (7.2) 
7079571 (9.6) 250 (4.2) 
8089252 (6.2) 95 (2.3) 
9088 (11.5) 84 (8.4) 
Sex 0.372 0.919
Male3,689 (17.3) 2,392 (11.2) 
Female3,650 (17.0) 2,478 (11.5) 
Drug <0.001 <0.001
Heparin6,833 (18.4) 4,515 (12.2) 
Enoxaparin506 (8.9) 355 (6.2) 
Length of stay, d <0.001 <0.001
01446 (24.3) 282 (15.4) 
231,463 (19.4) 971 (12.9) 
472,332 (18.9) 1,620 (13.1) 
83,098 (14.6) 1,997 (9.4) 
Figure 1
Proportion of prescribed doses not administered by unit and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) status

The results of the multivariate regression analyses with GEE are displayed in Table 4. HIV diagnosis, non‐African American race, and heparin (as compared with enoxaparin) were associated with increased likelihood of nonadministration. Increasing age and increasing length of stay were associated with decreased likelihood of nonadministration by a small but significant amount.

Multivariate Regression Analysis for Dose Nonadministration and Documented Refusal
 OR of Nonadministration95% CI, POR of Documented Refusal95% CI, P
  • NOTE: Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; OR, odds ratio.

Race    
African American1.00Reference1.00Reference
Caucasian1.621.44‐1.81, <0.0011.531.32‐1.77, <0.001
Asian, Pacific Islander, Other1.541.19‐2.00, 0.0011.481.07‐2.01, 0.019
HIV status    
Negative1.00Reference1.00Reference
Positive1.211.001.45, 0.0391.291.06‐1.56, 0.012
Age, per year0.970.97‐0.98, <0.0010.970.96‐0.97, <0.001
Drug    
Heparin1.00Reference1.00Reference
Enoxaparin0.450.40‐0.51, <0.0010.530.47‐0.61, <0.001
Length of stay, per day0.9910.987‐0.995, <0.0010.9890.983‐0.993, <0.001

The most commonly documented reason for nonadministration was refusal by the patient or family member (66% of all doses not administered). The second most common reason, patient condition not appropriate, accounted for an additional 10% of doses. Across all nursing units, the proportion of prescribed doses that were documented as refused was significantly greater for patients with HIV compared with patients without HIV (16.5% vs 10.6%, OR: 1.66, 95% CI: 1.54‐1.80, P<0.0001) (Table 2). Using the GEE and multivariate regression, HIV diagnosis, non‐African American race, and heparin were associated with increased risk of documented dose refusal. Age and length of stay were inversely related to the likelihood of documented dose refusal. When all administered doses were excluded from the analysis, the association between these variables and documented dose refusal were not as strong. Age and length of stay remained significantly inversely related; however, the other factors were no longer significantly positively associated with documented dose refusal.

Within the HIV care unit, the proportion of prescribed doses documented as refused was greater for patients with HIV compared with patients without HIV (18.1% vs 6.8%, OR: 3.01, 95% CI: 2.28‐3.99, P<0.0001). For all other medicine units, the proportion of nonadministered doses documented as refused was also greater for patients with HIV compared with patients without HIV (13.7% vs 10.7%, OR: 1.32, 95% CI: 1.16‐1.51, P<0.0001).

DISCUSSION

We have identified that nonadministration of thromboprophylaxis was more common among patients with HIV at our institution. Substantial variation in the proportion of doses not administered existed on the nursing unit level, as well as within each unit when stratified by HIV status. This disparity in dose administration was observed on the HIV care unit as well, as the proportion not administered was about 2‐fold greater for patients with HIV compared with those without HIV. Documented dose refusal appeared to account for the majority of nonadministered doses in our cohort. Our analysis also demonstrated that HIV diagnosis is significantly associated with both dose nonadministration and documented dose refusal at our institution.

Medication refusal is a well‐recognized phenomenon among hospitalized patients. A recent study of medication administration in hospitalized patients in the United Kingdom noted that refusal accounted for about 45% of omitted doses.[26] Fanikos et al. also found that documented refusal of doses contributed significantly to the overall number of VTE prophylaxis doses not administered to patients.[27] In our study, the proportion of nonadministered doses documented as refused by the patient or family member was significantly greater in patients with HIV than in patients without HIV across all units. Interestingly, the difference was greater on the HIV care unit when doses were stratified by HIV status. This observation leads us to hypothesize that specific hospital care environments may influence dose nonadministration and refusal rates among our patient population.

Based on regression analyses, increasing age and length of stay were associated with a decreased likelihood of any particular dose not being administered and with any particular dose being documented as refused. It is important to note that our GEE did not take into account date or time of each dose, and therefore we cannot make conclusions as to the likelihood of dose nonadministration or refusal of doses in relation to each other on a time scale. One cannot assume that a dose due later in a hospital course was more or less likely to be given than a dose due on the first hospital day. Although we did not expect these findings, one can hypothesize that patients who are older or have longer stays may be perceived to have more severe illness, and therefore greater need for prophylaxis, from nursing staff and others involved in their care. The associations were small but significant and warrant future investigation.

To our knowledge, this is the first investigation comparing the proportion of nonadministered doses of thromboprophylaxis between patients with and without HIV. Our data show that nonadministered doses and refused doses of thromboprophylaxis are more frequent among patients with HIV. In addition, we noted that nonadministration was more common on the dedicated HIV care unit compared with other units. We cannot currently offer a clear explanation for the disparity observed between units, and more specifically, within the HIV care unit. However, it is possible that a unique culture of care and provider‐specific factors may contribute.

Our study was limited by a number of factors. Seroconversion among patients during the study period was possible; however, our analysis revealed only 2 instances among nearly 4000 unique patients. A more significant limitation was the level of analysis allowed by the dataset. We examined dose characteristics on a dose and unit level, but the ability to analyze doses based on the prescriber and nurse level may have provided valuable insight into the specific reasons behind the observations presented here. Additionally, the specific unit assigned to a given dose in our dataset represented the discharge location for the corresponding patient, making it possible that some amount of nonadministered doses may be attributed to the incorrect unit. However, we do not believe that unit‐to‐unit transfers would be frequent enough to influence the overall results. In addition, we did not link nonadministration of thromboprophylaxis with VTE events, as these data were not present in the current dataset. Although this is a limitation of the current study, we believe that the notion that missed doses of thromboprophylaxis place patients at higher risk for VTE is plausible, as the efficacy of thromboprophylaxis is well established.[28, 29, 30] It is important to note that the reason for nonadministration selected by the nurse on the eMAR may not always represent the only reason or even the true reason for dose nonadministration. It is possible that dose refusal may be over‐represented in our sample, in part due to inaccurate documentation. Recent investigations at JHH have identified varying attitudes on the part of the patient and the nurse regarding thromboprophylaxis. A questionnaire and interview of patients showed a large knowledge gap regarding thromboprophylaxis, with many individuals unable to explain its role or significance in their medical care.[31] A common theme was also observed in a survey of nurses regarding VTE prophylaxis: doses were sometimes considered optional for reasons such as ambulation status, perceived severity of illness, or reason for hospitalization. Some nurses also reported that after an initial refused dose, they may continue to document subsequent doses as refused, sometimes without offering the dose to the patient.[32] As variation in practice was observed between individual nurses, it is also likely that the culture of care may vary between units, influencing thromboprophylaxis nonadministration rates as well as documentation of doses as refused. The dose‐level data used for the GEE analyses did not include date and time of administration, which limited the ability of the GEE to more completely account for autocorrelation.

To further investigate the findings of this and related studies, we intend to more closely analyze data at multiple levels with the goal of identifying an appropriate and feasible target for intervention. Additionally, further investigation should be performed with the goal of determining the relationship between decreased exposure to thromboprophylaxis and VTE. However, as patients with HIV appear to be at increased risk of VTE, ensuring that thromboprophylaxis is delivered appropriately and consistently should be an important goal for all who provide care to this population.

Patients with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) are at a 2‐ to 10‐fold greater risk for venous thromboembolism (VTE) compared with the general population.[1] Although antiphospholipid antibodies and protein S deficiency have often been cited as reasons for the thrombophilia associated with HIV, previous studies have also documented an increased risk of VTE with declining CD4+ cell count.[2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8] Worsening immune function places HIV patients at increased risk for opportunistic and nonopportunistic infections and malignancies, all independently associated with an increased risk of VTE.[5, 9, 10, 11, 12] Although increasing use of antiretroviral therapy has greatly decreased these sequelae, these complications of HIV infection are associated with an increased frequency of hospitalization.[13, 14, 15, 16] HIV infection and associated inflammation has been implicated in cardiovascular conditions such as cardiomyopathy, pulmonary hypertension, and myocardial infarction.[17, 18] Additionally, progression of HIV infection appears to influence T‐cell activation and differentiation in a manner that leads to early immunosenescence in infected individuals.[19, 20]

VTE prophylaxis is effective.[21] Virtually all efforts to decrease VTE have been focused on improving the prescription of prophylaxis with varying degrees of success.[22] These interventions have been employed with the tacit assumption that medication prescribed for inpatients will always be administered. However, at our institution, recent research has demonstrated that a significant proportion of prescribed thromboprophylaxis doses are not administered to hospitalized patients.[23] Refusal by the patient or a family member was the most commonly documented reason for dose nonadministration. In addition, the rate of thromboprophylaxis nonadministration varied greatly between nursing units with distinct patient populations. We hypothesized that nonadministration of VTE prophylaxis may be more common in patients with HIV, and this phenomenon may contribute to their increased risk for VTE.

The purpose of this study was to determine if the proportion of nonadministered thromboprophylaxis is greater among hospitalized patients with HIV and to characterize documented reasons for dose nonadministration.

METHODS

This study was conducted at The Johns Hopkins Hospital (JHH), a large, urban, academic medical center in Baltimore, Maryland. This single‐center retrospective cohort study utilized an existing dataset containing dose administration data extracted from an electronic medication administration record (eMAR). This dataset included information for all prescribed doses of thromboprophylaxis (heparin 5000 U subcutaneously every 8 or 12 hours, heparin 7500 U subcutaneously every 12 hours, enoxaparin 30 mg subcutaneously every 12 hours, or enoxaparin 40 mg subcutaneously daily) for patients hospitalized on medicine units at JHH from November 2007 to December 2008. This time period follows the implementation of an electronic order set for VTE prophylaxis.[24, 25] Data available for each dose included drug name, dose, frequency, patient demographics, and whether or not the dose was administered. Each dose not administered included a reason for nonadministration, which was chosen from a dropdown menu of responses on the eMAR by the nurse at the time the dose was due. A separate electronic report was obtained from an internal administrative database, which identified all patients within the dose administration dataset who had the International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision code 042 (HIV diagnosis). A report identifying patient history numbers with matching diagnostic code for HIV was appended to the dose administration dataset using a relational database (Microsoft Access; Microsoft Corp., Redmond, WA) prior to analysis. The dose administration data were obtained previously for a separate analysis.[23] Approval for this study was granted from the institutional review board of Johns Hopkins Medicine.

Our analytic plan included comparisons between patients with and without HIV on a dose, patient, and unit level. As JHH operates a nursing unit dedicated to the inpatient care of patients with HIV, we included analyses of dose characteristics between this unit and other medicine units. It should be noted that patients without a diagnosis of HIV are sometimes cared for on this unit. Therefore, the electronic medical record for each patient without the diagnosis code for HIV hospitalized on this unit was reviewed to determine HIV status. An analysis was performed comparing visit identification numbers with diagnosis codes to identify potential seroconversions during the study period. Although we planned to compare nonadministration and documented refusal of doses on the unit level, a lack of patients with HIV on a number of units limited our ability to perform these analyses.

Statistical Analysis

The percent of doses not administered was calculated as the number of doses not administered divided by the number of doses prescribed. Likewise, the percent of prescribed doses documented as refused was calculated as the number of prescribed doses documented as refused divided by the number of doses prescribed. For each comparison, an odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was reported. Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were performed to assess the relationship between patient factors and dose nonadministration and documented refusal, respectively. Generalized estimating equations (GEE) using a logit link and an exchangeable correlation structure were used in these analyses. The GEE technique was used to account for within‐individual correlation of administration and documented refusal status.

Categorical data were compared using the two‐sided [2] test. Parametric and nonparametric continuous data were compared using the Student t test and Mann‐Whitney U test, respectively. A P value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant for all analyses. Analyses were performed using Minitab 15 (Minitab Inc., State College, PA) and Stata (StataCorp, College Station, TX).

RESULTS

During the 8‐month study period, 42,870 doses of thromboprophylaxis were prescribed during 4947 patient admissions to 13 individual medicine units. Overall, the diagnosis code for HIV was present in 12% of patient visits. The proportion of nonadministered doses per unit ranged from 6% to 27%, whereas the number of doses prescribed per unit ranged from 34 to 7301.

Patient characteristics were described on the visit level (Table 1). Patients with HIV were significantly younger, more often male and black, and had a longer length of stay compared with patients without HIV. Patients hospitalized on the HIV care unit had similar characteristics to the overall population of patients with HIV. It should be noted that not all patients cared for on this unit had a diagnosis of HIV, as patients from other medicine services are sometimes cared for in this location.

Visit Characteristics
 Patients Without HIVPatients With HIVP
  • NOTE: Abbreviations: HIV, human immunodeficiency virus; IQR, interquartile range; N/A, not applicable; SD, standard deviation.

Visits, n4,364583N/A
Male, n (%)2,039 (47)370 (64)<0.001
Mean ageSD, y5618469<0.001
Race, n (%)   
African American2,603 (60)522 (90)<0.001
Caucasian1,610 (37)53 (9)<0.001
Asian, Pacific Islander, other151 (4)8 (1)0.006
Median length of stay (IQR), d3 (15)4 (27)0.002
Marital status, n (%)   
Single2,051 (47)471 (81)<0.001
Married1,405 (32)71 (12)<0.001
Widowed486 (11)10 (1)<0.001
Divorced402 (9)28 (5)<0.001
Separated33 (1)3 (1)0.607
Unknown5 (0)0 (0)0.465
Payor, n (%)   
Medicare1,771 (41)133 (23)<0.001
Medicaid1,343 (31)392 (67)<0.001
Commercial1,181 (27)43 (7)<0.001
Other including self‐pay69 (1)15 (3)0.087

Overall, 17% of prescribed prophylaxis doses were not administered. A greater proportion of prescribed doses were not administered to patients with HIV compared with patients without HIV (23.5% vs 16.1%, OR: 1.59, 95% CI: 1.49‐1.70, P<0.001) (Table 2). Using a GEE and univariate regression, HIV diagnosis was associated with nonadministration of doses (OR: 1.37, 95% CI: 1.17‐1.60, P<0.001) (Table 3). Race, age, length of stay, and drug (heparin vs enoxaparin) were each associated with nonadministration. There was no significant association between nonadministration and sex, marital status, or payor. When stratified by nursing unit, there was substantial variation in the proportion of nonadministered doses between units. Within each unit, the proportion of doses not administered varied when stratified by HIV status. For example, on unit A, the proportion of doses not administered was greater for patients with HIV compared with patients without HIV (33.3% vs 12.9%, OR: 3.38, 95% CI: 2.61 to 4.37, P<0.001) (Figure 1). However, on unit K, the proportion of doses not administered to patients with HIV was 2‐fold less than in patients without HIV (7.2% vs 14.3%, OR: 0.47, 95% CI: 0.30‐0.74, P<0.001). Unit‐level analysis was not possible in regression models due to drastic imbalance in the prevalence of HIV across units. When comparing doses prescribed in the HIV care unit to all other medicine units, the proportion not administered (23.9% vs 16.3%, OR: 1.61, 95% CI: 1.49‐1.73, P<0.001) closely resembled the values seen when comparing patients with and without HIV hospital wide (23.5% vs 16.1%). However, when doses on the HIV care unit were stratified by HIV status, the doses not administered were 2‐fold greater, as a proportion, for patients with HIV compared with those without HIV (26.4% vs 13.1%, OR: 2.39, 95% CI: 1.93‐2.96, P<0.001).

Doses Prescribed, Not Administered, and Documented as Refused
 Doses PrescribedDoses Not Administered (% of Doses Prescribed)Doses Documented as Refused (% of All Doses Prescribed)
  • NOTE: Abbreviations: HIV, human immunodeficiency.

  • P<0.001.

  • P=0.006.

All patients with HIV5,6811,334 (23.5%)a935 (16.5%)a
All patients without HIV37,1896,005 (16.1%)3,935 (10.6%)
HIV care unit4,4521,063 (23.9%)a709 (15.9%)a
All other units38,4186,276 (16.3%)4,161 (10.8%)
HIV care unit: patients with HIV3,602952 (26.4%)a651 (18.1%)a
HIV care unit: patients without HIV850111 (13.1%)58 (6.8%)
All other units: patients with HIV2,079382 (18.4%)b284 (13.7%)a
All other units: patients without HIV36,3395,894 (16.2%)3,877 (10.7%)
Univariate Regression Analysis for Dose Nonadministration and Documented Refusal
 Nonadministered, n (%)PDocumented as Refused, n (%)P
  • NOTE: Abbreviations: HIV, human immunodeficiency.

Race 0.001 0.072
African American2,601 (17.8) 1,708 (11.7) 
Caucasian4,379 (16.4) 2,922 (10.9) 
Asian, Pacific Islander, other359 (23.4) 240 (15.6) 
HIV status <0.001 0.002
Negative6,005 (16.2) 3,935 (10.6) 
Positive1,344 (23.5) 935 (16.5) 
Age, y <0.001 <0.001
1959 (20.6) 44 (15.3) 
20291,260 (33.8) 1,000 (26.8) 
30391,088 (28.1) 845 (21.8) 
40491,628 (21.0) 1,104 (14.2) 
50591,493 (16.1) 953 (10.3) 
6069900 (12.6) 515 (7.2) 
7079571 (9.6) 250 (4.2) 
8089252 (6.2) 95 (2.3) 
9088 (11.5) 84 (8.4) 
Sex 0.372 0.919
Male3,689 (17.3) 2,392 (11.2) 
Female3,650 (17.0) 2,478 (11.5) 
Drug <0.001 <0.001
Heparin6,833 (18.4) 4,515 (12.2) 
Enoxaparin506 (8.9) 355 (6.2) 
Length of stay, d <0.001 <0.001
01446 (24.3) 282 (15.4) 
231,463 (19.4) 971 (12.9) 
472,332 (18.9) 1,620 (13.1) 
83,098 (14.6) 1,997 (9.4) 
Figure 1
Proportion of prescribed doses not administered by unit and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) status

The results of the multivariate regression analyses with GEE are displayed in Table 4. HIV diagnosis, non‐African American race, and heparin (as compared with enoxaparin) were associated with increased likelihood of nonadministration. Increasing age and increasing length of stay were associated with decreased likelihood of nonadministration by a small but significant amount.

Multivariate Regression Analysis for Dose Nonadministration and Documented Refusal
 OR of Nonadministration95% CI, POR of Documented Refusal95% CI, P
  • NOTE: Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; OR, odds ratio.

Race    
African American1.00Reference1.00Reference
Caucasian1.621.44‐1.81, <0.0011.531.32‐1.77, <0.001
Asian, Pacific Islander, Other1.541.19‐2.00, 0.0011.481.07‐2.01, 0.019
HIV status    
Negative1.00Reference1.00Reference
Positive1.211.001.45, 0.0391.291.06‐1.56, 0.012
Age, per year0.970.97‐0.98, <0.0010.970.96‐0.97, <0.001
Drug    
Heparin1.00Reference1.00Reference
Enoxaparin0.450.40‐0.51, <0.0010.530.47‐0.61, <0.001
Length of stay, per day0.9910.987‐0.995, <0.0010.9890.983‐0.993, <0.001

The most commonly documented reason for nonadministration was refusal by the patient or family member (66% of all doses not administered). The second most common reason, patient condition not appropriate, accounted for an additional 10% of doses. Across all nursing units, the proportion of prescribed doses that were documented as refused was significantly greater for patients with HIV compared with patients without HIV (16.5% vs 10.6%, OR: 1.66, 95% CI: 1.54‐1.80, P<0.0001) (Table 2). Using the GEE and multivariate regression, HIV diagnosis, non‐African American race, and heparin were associated with increased risk of documented dose refusal. Age and length of stay were inversely related to the likelihood of documented dose refusal. When all administered doses were excluded from the analysis, the association between these variables and documented dose refusal were not as strong. Age and length of stay remained significantly inversely related; however, the other factors were no longer significantly positively associated with documented dose refusal.

Within the HIV care unit, the proportion of prescribed doses documented as refused was greater for patients with HIV compared with patients without HIV (18.1% vs 6.8%, OR: 3.01, 95% CI: 2.28‐3.99, P<0.0001). For all other medicine units, the proportion of nonadministered doses documented as refused was also greater for patients with HIV compared with patients without HIV (13.7% vs 10.7%, OR: 1.32, 95% CI: 1.16‐1.51, P<0.0001).

DISCUSSION

We have identified that nonadministration of thromboprophylaxis was more common among patients with HIV at our institution. Substantial variation in the proportion of doses not administered existed on the nursing unit level, as well as within each unit when stratified by HIV status. This disparity in dose administration was observed on the HIV care unit as well, as the proportion not administered was about 2‐fold greater for patients with HIV compared with those without HIV. Documented dose refusal appeared to account for the majority of nonadministered doses in our cohort. Our analysis also demonstrated that HIV diagnosis is significantly associated with both dose nonadministration and documented dose refusal at our institution.

Medication refusal is a well‐recognized phenomenon among hospitalized patients. A recent study of medication administration in hospitalized patients in the United Kingdom noted that refusal accounted for about 45% of omitted doses.[26] Fanikos et al. also found that documented refusal of doses contributed significantly to the overall number of VTE prophylaxis doses not administered to patients.[27] In our study, the proportion of nonadministered doses documented as refused by the patient or family member was significantly greater in patients with HIV than in patients without HIV across all units. Interestingly, the difference was greater on the HIV care unit when doses were stratified by HIV status. This observation leads us to hypothesize that specific hospital care environments may influence dose nonadministration and refusal rates among our patient population.

Based on regression analyses, increasing age and length of stay were associated with a decreased likelihood of any particular dose not being administered and with any particular dose being documented as refused. It is important to note that our GEE did not take into account date or time of each dose, and therefore we cannot make conclusions as to the likelihood of dose nonadministration or refusal of doses in relation to each other on a time scale. One cannot assume that a dose due later in a hospital course was more or less likely to be given than a dose due on the first hospital day. Although we did not expect these findings, one can hypothesize that patients who are older or have longer stays may be perceived to have more severe illness, and therefore greater need for prophylaxis, from nursing staff and others involved in their care. The associations were small but significant and warrant future investigation.

To our knowledge, this is the first investigation comparing the proportion of nonadministered doses of thromboprophylaxis between patients with and without HIV. Our data show that nonadministered doses and refused doses of thromboprophylaxis are more frequent among patients with HIV. In addition, we noted that nonadministration was more common on the dedicated HIV care unit compared with other units. We cannot currently offer a clear explanation for the disparity observed between units, and more specifically, within the HIV care unit. However, it is possible that a unique culture of care and provider‐specific factors may contribute.

Our study was limited by a number of factors. Seroconversion among patients during the study period was possible; however, our analysis revealed only 2 instances among nearly 4000 unique patients. A more significant limitation was the level of analysis allowed by the dataset. We examined dose characteristics on a dose and unit level, but the ability to analyze doses based on the prescriber and nurse level may have provided valuable insight into the specific reasons behind the observations presented here. Additionally, the specific unit assigned to a given dose in our dataset represented the discharge location for the corresponding patient, making it possible that some amount of nonadministered doses may be attributed to the incorrect unit. However, we do not believe that unit‐to‐unit transfers would be frequent enough to influence the overall results. In addition, we did not link nonadministration of thromboprophylaxis with VTE events, as these data were not present in the current dataset. Although this is a limitation of the current study, we believe that the notion that missed doses of thromboprophylaxis place patients at higher risk for VTE is plausible, as the efficacy of thromboprophylaxis is well established.[28, 29, 30] It is important to note that the reason for nonadministration selected by the nurse on the eMAR may not always represent the only reason or even the true reason for dose nonadministration. It is possible that dose refusal may be over‐represented in our sample, in part due to inaccurate documentation. Recent investigations at JHH have identified varying attitudes on the part of the patient and the nurse regarding thromboprophylaxis. A questionnaire and interview of patients showed a large knowledge gap regarding thromboprophylaxis, with many individuals unable to explain its role or significance in their medical care.[31] A common theme was also observed in a survey of nurses regarding VTE prophylaxis: doses were sometimes considered optional for reasons such as ambulation status, perceived severity of illness, or reason for hospitalization. Some nurses also reported that after an initial refused dose, they may continue to document subsequent doses as refused, sometimes without offering the dose to the patient.[32] As variation in practice was observed between individual nurses, it is also likely that the culture of care may vary between units, influencing thromboprophylaxis nonadministration rates as well as documentation of doses as refused. The dose‐level data used for the GEE analyses did not include date and time of administration, which limited the ability of the GEE to more completely account for autocorrelation.

To further investigate the findings of this and related studies, we intend to more closely analyze data at multiple levels with the goal of identifying an appropriate and feasible target for intervention. Additionally, further investigation should be performed with the goal of determining the relationship between decreased exposure to thromboprophylaxis and VTE. However, as patients with HIV appear to be at increased risk of VTE, ensuring that thromboprophylaxis is delivered appropriately and consistently should be an important goal for all who provide care to this population.

References
  1. Ahonkhai A, Gebo K, Streiff M, Moore R, Segal J. Venous thromboembolism in patients with HIV/AIDS: a case‐control study. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2008;48(3):310314.
  2. Saif M, Bona R, Greenberg B. AIDS and thrombosis: retrospective study of 131 HIV‐infected patients. AIDS Patient Care STDS. 2001;15(6):311320.
  3. Rasmussen LD, Dybdal M, Gerstoft J, et al. HIV and risk of venous thromboembolism: a Danish nationwide population‐based cohort study. HIV Med. 2011;12(4):202210.
  4. Sullivan PS, Dworkin MS, Jones JL, Hooper WC. Epidemiology of thrombosis in HIV‐infected individuals. The adult/adolescent spectrum of HIV disease project. AIDS. 2000;14(3):321324.
  5. Jacobson MC, Dezube BJ, Aboulafia DM. Thrombotic complications in patients infected with HIV in the era of highly active antiretroviral therapy: a case series. Clin Infect Dis. 2004;39(8):12141222.
  6. Cohen AJ, Philips TM, Kessler CM. Circulating coagulation inhibitors in the acquired immunodeficiency syndrome. Ann Intern Med. 1986;104(2):175180.
  7. Giannakopoulos B, Krilis SA. The pathogenesis of the antiphospholipid syndrome. N Engl J Med. 2013;368(11):10331044.
  8. Erbe M, Rickerts V, Bauersachs RM, Lindhoff‐Last E. Acquired protein C and protein S deficiency in HIV‐infected patients. Clin Appl Thromb Hemost. 2003;9(4):325331.
  9. Labarca JA, Rabaggliati RM, Radrigan FJ, et al. Antiphospholipid syndrome associated with cytomegalovirus infection: case report and review. Clin Infect Dis. 1997;24(2):197200.
  10. Uthman IW, Gharavi AE. Viral infections and antiphospholipid antibodies. Semin Arthritis Rheum. 2002;31(4):256263.
  11. Silverberg MJ, Abrams DI. AIDS‐defining and non‐AIDS‐defining malignancies: cancer occurrence in the antiretroviral therapy era. Curr Opin Oncol. 2007;19(5):446451.
  12. Franchini M, Montagnana M, Targher G, Manzato F, Lippi G. Pathogenesis, clinical and laboratory aspects of thrombosis in cancer. J Thromb Thrombolysis. 2007;24(1):2938.
  13. Betz ME, Gebo KA, Barber E, et al. Patterns of diagnoses in hospital admissions in a multistate cohort of HIV‐positive adults in 2001. Med Care. 2005;43(9 suppl):III3III14.
  14. Bonnet F, Lewden C, May T, et al. Opportunistic infections as causes of death in HIV‐infected patients in the HAART era in France. Scand J Infect Dis. 2005;37(6‐7):482487.
  15. Buchacz K, Baker RK, Moorman AC, et al. Rates of hospitalizations and associated diagnoses in a large multisite cohort of HIV patients in the United States, 1994–2005. AIDS. 2008;22(11):13451354.
  16. Gebo KA, Fleishman JA, Moore RD. Hospitalizations for metabolic conditions, opportunistic infections, and injection drug use among HIV patients: trends between 1996 and 2000 in 12 states. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2005;40(5):609616.
  17. Sudano I, Spieker LE, Noll G, Corti R, Weber R, Luscher T. Cardiovascular disease in HIV infection. Am Heart J. 2006;151:11471155.
  18. Currier JS, Lundgren JD, Carr A, et al. Epidemiological evidence for cardiovascular disease in HIV‐infected patients and relationship to highly active antiretroviral therapy. Circulation. 2008;118(2):e29e35.
  19. Papagno L, Spina C, Marchant A, et al. Immune activation and CD8+ T‐cell differentiation towards senescence in HIV‐1 infection. PLoS Biol. 2004;2(2):E20.
  20. Sousa A, Carneiro J, Meier‐Schellersheim M, Grossman Z, Victorino R. CD4 T cell depletion is linked directly to immune activation in the pathogenesis of HIV‐1 and HIV‐2 but only indirectly to the viral load. J Immunol. 2002;169(6):34003406.
  21. Streiff MB, Lau BD. Thromboprophylaxis in nonsurgical patients. Hematology Am Soc Hematol Educ Program. 2012;2012:631637.
  22. Lau BD, Haut ER. Practices to prevent venous thromboembolism [published online ahead of print May 24, 2013]. BMJ Qual Saf. doi:10.1136/bmjqs‐2012‐001782.
  23. Shermock KM, Lau BD, Haut ER, et al. Patterns of non‐administration of ordered doses of venous thromboembolism prophylaxis: implications for novel intervention strategies. PLoS One. 2013;8(6):e66311.
  24. Streiff MB, Carolan H, Hobson DB, et al. Lessons from The Johns Hopkins multi‐disciplinary venous thromboembolism (VTE) prevention collaborative. BMJ. 2012;344:e3935.
  25. Zeidan AM, Streiff MB, Lau BD, et al. Impact of a venous thromboembolism prophylaxis “smart order set”: improved compliance, fewer events [published online ahead of print April 4, 2013]. Am J Hematol. doi: 10.1002/ajh.23450.
  26. Coleman JJ, McDowell SE, Ferner RE. Dose omissions in hospitalized patients in a UK hospital: an analysis of the relative contribution of adverse drug reactions. Drug Saf. 2012;35(8):677683.
  27. Fanikos J, Stevens LA, Labreche M, et al. Adherence to pharmacological thromboprophylaxis orders in hospitalized patients. Am J Med. 2010;123(6):536541.
  28. Samama MM, Cohen AT, Darmon JY, et al. A comparison of enoxaparin with placebo for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in acutely ill medical patients. Prophylaxis in medical patients with enoxaparin study group. N Engl J Med. 1999;341(11):793800.
  29. Leizorovicz A, Cohen AT, Turpie AG, et al. Randomized, placebo‐controlled trial of dalteparin for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in acutely ill medical patients. Circulation. 2004;110(7):874879.
  30. Cohen AT, Davidson BL, Gallus AS, et al. Efficacy and safety of fondaparinux for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in older acute medical patients: randomised placebo controlled trial. BMJ. 2006;332(7537):325329.
  31. Wong A, Streiff M, Haut E, et al. Patient perspectives on pharmacological venous thromboembolism prophylaxis at The Johns Hopkins Hospital. J Thromb Thrombolysis. 2013;35(3):416.
  32. Elder S, Shermock K, Haut E, et al. Culture of care and documented patient refusal of pharmacologic venous thromboembolism prophylaxis. J Thromb Thrombolysis. 2011;31(3):367400.
References
  1. Ahonkhai A, Gebo K, Streiff M, Moore R, Segal J. Venous thromboembolism in patients with HIV/AIDS: a case‐control study. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2008;48(3):310314.
  2. Saif M, Bona R, Greenberg B. AIDS and thrombosis: retrospective study of 131 HIV‐infected patients. AIDS Patient Care STDS. 2001;15(6):311320.
  3. Rasmussen LD, Dybdal M, Gerstoft J, et al. HIV and risk of venous thromboembolism: a Danish nationwide population‐based cohort study. HIV Med. 2011;12(4):202210.
  4. Sullivan PS, Dworkin MS, Jones JL, Hooper WC. Epidemiology of thrombosis in HIV‐infected individuals. The adult/adolescent spectrum of HIV disease project. AIDS. 2000;14(3):321324.
  5. Jacobson MC, Dezube BJ, Aboulafia DM. Thrombotic complications in patients infected with HIV in the era of highly active antiretroviral therapy: a case series. Clin Infect Dis. 2004;39(8):12141222.
  6. Cohen AJ, Philips TM, Kessler CM. Circulating coagulation inhibitors in the acquired immunodeficiency syndrome. Ann Intern Med. 1986;104(2):175180.
  7. Giannakopoulos B, Krilis SA. The pathogenesis of the antiphospholipid syndrome. N Engl J Med. 2013;368(11):10331044.
  8. Erbe M, Rickerts V, Bauersachs RM, Lindhoff‐Last E. Acquired protein C and protein S deficiency in HIV‐infected patients. Clin Appl Thromb Hemost. 2003;9(4):325331.
  9. Labarca JA, Rabaggliati RM, Radrigan FJ, et al. Antiphospholipid syndrome associated with cytomegalovirus infection: case report and review. Clin Infect Dis. 1997;24(2):197200.
  10. Uthman IW, Gharavi AE. Viral infections and antiphospholipid antibodies. Semin Arthritis Rheum. 2002;31(4):256263.
  11. Silverberg MJ, Abrams DI. AIDS‐defining and non‐AIDS‐defining malignancies: cancer occurrence in the antiretroviral therapy era. Curr Opin Oncol. 2007;19(5):446451.
  12. Franchini M, Montagnana M, Targher G, Manzato F, Lippi G. Pathogenesis, clinical and laboratory aspects of thrombosis in cancer. J Thromb Thrombolysis. 2007;24(1):2938.
  13. Betz ME, Gebo KA, Barber E, et al. Patterns of diagnoses in hospital admissions in a multistate cohort of HIV‐positive adults in 2001. Med Care. 2005;43(9 suppl):III3III14.
  14. Bonnet F, Lewden C, May T, et al. Opportunistic infections as causes of death in HIV‐infected patients in the HAART era in France. Scand J Infect Dis. 2005;37(6‐7):482487.
  15. Buchacz K, Baker RK, Moorman AC, et al. Rates of hospitalizations and associated diagnoses in a large multisite cohort of HIV patients in the United States, 1994–2005. AIDS. 2008;22(11):13451354.
  16. Gebo KA, Fleishman JA, Moore RD. Hospitalizations for metabolic conditions, opportunistic infections, and injection drug use among HIV patients: trends between 1996 and 2000 in 12 states. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2005;40(5):609616.
  17. Sudano I, Spieker LE, Noll G, Corti R, Weber R, Luscher T. Cardiovascular disease in HIV infection. Am Heart J. 2006;151:11471155.
  18. Currier JS, Lundgren JD, Carr A, et al. Epidemiological evidence for cardiovascular disease in HIV‐infected patients and relationship to highly active antiretroviral therapy. Circulation. 2008;118(2):e29e35.
  19. Papagno L, Spina C, Marchant A, et al. Immune activation and CD8+ T‐cell differentiation towards senescence in HIV‐1 infection. PLoS Biol. 2004;2(2):E20.
  20. Sousa A, Carneiro J, Meier‐Schellersheim M, Grossman Z, Victorino R. CD4 T cell depletion is linked directly to immune activation in the pathogenesis of HIV‐1 and HIV‐2 but only indirectly to the viral load. J Immunol. 2002;169(6):34003406.
  21. Streiff MB, Lau BD. Thromboprophylaxis in nonsurgical patients. Hematology Am Soc Hematol Educ Program. 2012;2012:631637.
  22. Lau BD, Haut ER. Practices to prevent venous thromboembolism [published online ahead of print May 24, 2013]. BMJ Qual Saf. doi:10.1136/bmjqs‐2012‐001782.
  23. Shermock KM, Lau BD, Haut ER, et al. Patterns of non‐administration of ordered doses of venous thromboembolism prophylaxis: implications for novel intervention strategies. PLoS One. 2013;8(6):e66311.
  24. Streiff MB, Carolan H, Hobson DB, et al. Lessons from The Johns Hopkins multi‐disciplinary venous thromboembolism (VTE) prevention collaborative. BMJ. 2012;344:e3935.
  25. Zeidan AM, Streiff MB, Lau BD, et al. Impact of a venous thromboembolism prophylaxis “smart order set”: improved compliance, fewer events [published online ahead of print April 4, 2013]. Am J Hematol. doi: 10.1002/ajh.23450.
  26. Coleman JJ, McDowell SE, Ferner RE. Dose omissions in hospitalized patients in a UK hospital: an analysis of the relative contribution of adverse drug reactions. Drug Saf. 2012;35(8):677683.
  27. Fanikos J, Stevens LA, Labreche M, et al. Adherence to pharmacological thromboprophylaxis orders in hospitalized patients. Am J Med. 2010;123(6):536541.
  28. Samama MM, Cohen AT, Darmon JY, et al. A comparison of enoxaparin with placebo for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in acutely ill medical patients. Prophylaxis in medical patients with enoxaparin study group. N Engl J Med. 1999;341(11):793800.
  29. Leizorovicz A, Cohen AT, Turpie AG, et al. Randomized, placebo‐controlled trial of dalteparin for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in acutely ill medical patients. Circulation. 2004;110(7):874879.
  30. Cohen AT, Davidson BL, Gallus AS, et al. Efficacy and safety of fondaparinux for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in older acute medical patients: randomised placebo controlled trial. BMJ. 2006;332(7537):325329.
  31. Wong A, Streiff M, Haut E, et al. Patient perspectives on pharmacological venous thromboembolism prophylaxis at The Johns Hopkins Hospital. J Thromb Thrombolysis. 2013;35(3):416.
  32. Elder S, Shermock K, Haut E, et al. Culture of care and documented patient refusal of pharmacologic venous thromboembolism prophylaxis. J Thromb Thrombolysis. 2011;31(3):367400.
Issue
Journal of Hospital Medicine - 9(4)
Issue
Journal of Hospital Medicine - 9(4)
Page Number
215-220
Page Number
215-220
Article Type
Display Headline
Nonadministration of thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized patients with HIV: A missed opportunity for prevention?
Display Headline
Nonadministration of thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized patients with HIV: A missed opportunity for prevention?
Sections
Article Source

© 2014 Society of Hospital Medicine

Disallow All Ads
Correspondence Location
Address for correspondence and reprint requests: Matthew J. Newman, PharmD, Department of Pharmacy, The Johns Hopkins Hospital, 600 N. Wolfe Street, Carnegie 180, Baltimore, MD 21287; Telephone: 410‐614‐6773; Fax: 410‐502‐0788; E‐mail: [email protected]
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Article PDF Media
Media Files