OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of restricting ciprofloxacin on the resistance of nosocomial gram-negative bacilli, including Pseudomonas aeruginosa, to antipseudomonal carbapenems. DESIGN: Interrupted time-series analysis. SETTING: Tertiary care teaching hospital with 11 intensive care and intermediate care units with a total of 295 beds. PATIENTS: All nosocomial isolates of P. aeruginosa. INTERVENTION: Restriction of ciprofloxacin. RESULTS: There was a significant decreasing trend observed in the percentage (P = .0351) and the rate (P = .0006) of isolates of P. aeruginosa that were resistant to antipseudomonal carbapenems following the restriction of ciprofloxacin. There was also a significant decreasing trend observed in the percentage (P = .0017) and the rate (P = .0001) of isolates of ciprofloxacin-resistant P. aeruginosa. The rate of cefepime-resistant P. aeruginosa isolates declined (P = .004) but the percentage of cefepime-resistant P. aeruginosa isolates did not change. There were no significant changes observed in the rate or the percentage of piperacillin-tazobactam-resistant P. aeruginosa isolates. There were no significant changes observed in the susceptibilities of nosocomial Enterobacteriaciae or Acinetobacter baumannii isolates that were resistant to carbapenems. Over the study period there was a significant increase in the use of carbapenems (P = .0134); the use of ciprofloxacin decreased significantly (P = .0027). There were no significant changes in the use of piperacillin-tazobactam or cefepime. CONCLUSION: Restriction of ciprofloxacin was associated with a decreased resistance of P. aeruginosa isolates to antipseudomonal carbapenems and ciprofloxacin in our hospital's intermediate care and intensive care units. There were no changes observed in the susceptibilities of nosocomial Enterobacteriaciae or A. baumannii to carbapenems, despite increased carbapenem use. Reducing ciprofloxacin use may be a means of controlling multidrug-resistant P. aeruginosa.
OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of restricting ciprofloxacin on the resistance of nosocomial gram-negative bacilli, including Pseudomonas aeruginosa, to antipseudomonal carbapenems. DESIGN: Interrupted time-series analysis. SETTING: Tertiary care teaching hospital with 11 intensive care and intermediate care units with a total of 295 beds. PATIENTS: All nosocomial isolates of P. aeruginosa. INTERVENTION: Restriction of ciprofloxacin. RESULTS: There was a significant decreasing trend observed in the percentage (P = .0351) and the rate (P = .0006) of isolates of P. aeruginosa that were resistant to antipseudomonal carbapenems following the restriction of ciprofloxacin. There was also a significant decreasing trend observed in the percentage (P = .0017) and the rate (P = .0001) of isolates of ciprofloxacin-resistant P. aeruginosa. The rate of cefepime-resistant P. aeruginosa isolates declined (P = .004) but the percentage of cefepime-resistant P. aeruginosa isolates did not change. There were no significant changes observed in the rate or the percentage of piperacillin-tazobactam-resistant P. aeruginosa isolates. There were no significant changes observed in the susceptibilities of nosocomial Enterobacteriaciae or Acinetobacter baumannii isolates that were resistant to carbapenems. Over the study period there was a significant increase in the use of carbapenems (P = .0134); the use of ciprofloxacin decreased significantly (P = .0027). There were no significant changes in the use of piperacillin-tazobactam or cefepime. CONCLUSION: Restriction of ciprofloxacin was associated with a decreased resistance of P. aeruginosa isolates to antipseudomonal carbapenems and ciprofloxacin in our hospital's intermediate care and intensive care units. There were no changes observed in the susceptibilities of nosocomial Enterobacteriaciae or A. baumannii to carbapenems, despite increased carbapenem use. Reducing ciprofloxacin use may be a means of controlling multidrug-resistant P. aeruginosa.
Authors: Tamar F Barlam; Sara E Cosgrove; Lilian M Abbo; Conan MacDougall; Audrey N Schuetz; Edward J Septimus; Arjun Srinivasan; Timothy H Dellit; Yngve T Falck-Ytter; Neil O Fishman; Cindy W Hamilton; Timothy C Jenkins; Pamela A Lipsett; Preeti N Malani; Larissa S May; Gregory J Moran; Melinda M Neuhauser; Jason G Newland; Christopher A Ohl; Matthew H Samore; Susan K Seo; Kavita K Trivedi Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2016-04-13 Impact factor: 9.079
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: Nasia Safdar; Vishala Parmasad; Roger Brown; Pascale Carayon; Alexander Lepak; John C O'Horo; Lucas Schulz Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2021-06-29 Impact factor: 2.692