BACKGROUND: A new category of healthcare-associated pneumonia (HCAP) has been added in the most recent American Thoracic Society/Infectious Diseases Society of America (ATS/IDSA) guidelines, since multidrug-resistant (MDR) pathogens are more common in patients with HCAP than in those with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). The optimal empirical management of patients with HCAP remains controversial and adherence to guidelines is inconsistent. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of 3295 adults admitted for pneumonia in an academic centre of Canada, between 1997 and 2008. RESULTS: MDR pathogens were more common among patients with HCAP than in those with CAP, but less so than in other studies. Compared with patients with CAP, those with HCAP had a higher all-cause 30 day mortality [68/563 (12%) versus 201/2732 (7%); P < 0.001] and more frequent need for mechanical ventilation [78/563 (14%) versus 276/2732 (10%); P = 0.01]. In patients with CAP, mortality was lower when treatment was concordant with guidelines [86/1557 (6%) versus 109/1097 (10%) if discordant; adjusted odds ratio 0.6 (0.4-0.8); P < 0.001]. In HCAP, mortality was similar whether or not empirical treatment was concordant with guidelines [6/35 (17%) versus 18/148 (12%) if discordant; P = 0.4]. However, 30 day mortality tended to be higher when the empirical treatment was microbiologically ineffective [4/22 (18%) versus 17/187 (9%) when effective; P = 0.3]. CONCLUSIONS: HCAP is associated with worse outcomes than CAP. MDR pathogens were implicated in only a small fraction of HCAP cases. In our study, unlike CAP, non-respect of current HCAP guidelines had no adverse effect on the ultimate outcome. Strategies for the empirical management of HCAP should be tailored to the local epidemiological context.
BACKGROUND: A new category of healthcare-associated pneumonia (HCAP) has been added in the most recent American Thoracic Society/Infectious Diseases Society of America (ATS/IDSA) guidelines, since multidrug-resistant (MDR) pathogens are more common in patients with HCAP than in those with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). The optimal empirical management of patients with HCAP remains controversial and adherence to guidelines is inconsistent. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of 3295 adults admitted for pneumonia in an academic centre of Canada, between 1997 and 2008. RESULTS: MDR pathogens were more common among patients with HCAP than in those with CAP, but less so than in other studies. Compared with patients with CAP, those with HCAP had a higher all-cause 30 day mortality [68/563 (12%) versus 201/2732 (7%); P < 0.001] and more frequent need for mechanical ventilation [78/563 (14%) versus 276/2732 (10%); P = 0.01]. In patients with CAP, mortality was lower when treatment was concordant with guidelines [86/1557 (6%) versus 109/1097 (10%) if discordant; adjusted odds ratio 0.6 (0.4-0.8); P < 0.001]. In HCAP, mortality was similar whether or not empirical treatment was concordant with guidelines [6/35 (17%) versus 18/148 (12%) if discordant; P = 0.4]. However, 30 day mortality tended to be higher when the empirical treatment was microbiologically ineffective [4/22 (18%) versus 17/187 (9%) when effective; P = 0.3]. CONCLUSIONS:HCAP is associated with worse outcomes than CAP. MDR pathogens were implicated in only a small fraction of HCAP cases. In our study, unlike CAP, non-respect of current HCAP guidelines had no adverse effect on the ultimate outcome. Strategies for the empirical management of HCAP should be tailored to the local epidemiological context.
Authors: V Spoorenberg; J M Prins; E E Stobberingh; M E J L Hulscher; S E Geerlings Journal: Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis Date: 2013-07-04 Impact factor: 3.267
Authors: Alan E Gross; Trevor C Van Schooneveld; Keith M Olsen; Mark E Rupp; Thu Hong Bui; Elsie Forsung; Andre C Kalil Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2014-06-23 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: K de With; F Allerberger; S Amann; P Apfalter; H-R Brodt; T Eckmanns; M Fellhauer; H K Geiss; O Janata; R Krause; S Lemmen; E Meyer; H Mittermayer; U Porsche; E Presterl; S Reuter; B Sinha; R Strauß; A Wechsler-Fördös; C Wenisch; W V Kern Journal: Infection Date: 2016-06 Impact factor: 3.553
Authors: Mustafa Ozkaynak; Noel Metcalf; Daniel M Cohen; Larissa S May; Peter S Dayan; Rakesh D Mistry Journal: Appl Clin Inform Date: 2020-09-09 Impact factor: 2.342
Authors: Russell T Attridge; Christopher R Frei; Mary Jo V Pugh; Kenneth A Lawson; Laurajo Ryan; Antonio Anzueto; Mark L Metersky; Marcos I Restrepo; Eric M Mortensen Journal: J Crit Care Date: 2016-08-11 Impact factor: 3.425
Authors: Michael B Rothberg; Marya D Zilberberg; Penelope S Pekow; Aruna Priya; Sarah Haessler; Raquel Belforti; Daniel Skiest; Tara Lagu; Thomas L Higgins; Peter K Lindenauer Journal: J Antimicrob Chemother Date: 2015-01-03 Impact factor: 5.790
Authors: Barbara E Jones; Makoto M Jones; Benedikt Huttner; Gregory Stoddard; Kevin Antoine Brown; Vanessa W Stevens; Tom Greene; Brian Sauer; Karl Madaras-Kelly; Michael Rubin; Matthew Bidwell Goetz; Matthew Samore Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2015-07-29 Impact factor: 9.079