19
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Optimizing the Management of Uncomplicated Gram-Negative Bloodstream Infections: Consensus Guidance Using a Modified Delphi Process

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Guidance on the recommended durations of antibiotic therapy, the use of oral antibiotic therapy, and the need for repeat blood cultures remain incomplete for gram-negative bloodstream infections. We convened a panel of infectious diseases specialists to develop a consensus definition of uncomplicated gram-negative bloodstream infections to assist clinicians with management decisions.

          Methods

          Panelists, who were all blinded to the identity of other members of the panel, used a modified Delphi technique to develop a list of statements describing preferred management approaches for uncomplicated gram-negative bloodstream infections. Panelists provided level of agreement and feedback on consensus statements generated and refined them from the first round of open-ended questions through 3 subsequent rounds.

          Results

          Thirteen infectious diseases specialists (7 physicians and 6 pharmacists) from across the United States participated in the consensus process. A definition of uncomplicated gram-negative bloodstream infection was developed. Considerations cited by panelists in determining if a bloodstream infection was uncomplicated included host immune status, response to therapy, organism identified, source of the bacteremia, and source control measures. For patients meeting this definition, panelists largely agreed that a duration of therapy of ~7 days, transitioning to oral antibiotic therapy, and forgoing repeat blood cultures, was reasonable.

          Conclusions

          In the absence of professional guidelines for the management of uncomplicated gram-negative bloodstream infections, the consensus statements developed by a panel of infectious diseases specialists can provide guidance to practitioners for a common clinical scenario.

          Related collections

          Most cited references37

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Research guidelines for the Delphi survey technique.

          Consensus methods such as the Delphi survey technique are being employed to help enhance effective decision-making in health and social care. The Delphi survey is a group facilitation technique, which is an iterative multistage process, designed to transform opinion into group consensus. It is a flexible approach, that is used commonly within the health and social sciences, yet little guidance exists to help researchers undertake this method of data collection. This paper aims to provide an understanding of the preparation, action steps and difficulties that are inherent within the Delphi. Used systematically and rigorously, the Delphi can contribute significantly to broadening knowledge within the nursing profession. However, careful thought must be given before using the method; there are key issues surrounding problem identification, researcher skills and data presentation that must be addressed. The paper does not claim to be definitive; it purports to act as a guide for those researchers who wish to exploit the Delphi methodology.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Infective Endocarditis in Adults: Diagnosis, Antimicrobial Therapy, and Management of Complications: A Scientific Statement for Healthcare Professionals From the American Heart Association.

            Infective endocarditis is a potentially lethal disease that has undergone major changes in both host and pathogen. The epidemiology of infective endocarditis has become more complex with today's myriad healthcare-associated factors that predispose to infection. Moreover, changes in pathogen prevalence, in particular a more common staphylococcal origin, have affected outcomes, which have not improved despite medical and surgical advances.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              The answer is 17 years, what is the question: understanding time lags in translational research

              This study aimed to review the literature describing and quantifying time lags in the health research translation process. Papers were included in the review if they quantified time lags in the development of health interventions. The study identified 23 papers. Few were comparable as different studies use different measures, of different things, at different time points. We concluded that the current state of knowledge of time lags is of limited use to those responsible for R&D and knowledge transfer who face difficulties in knowing what they should or can do to reduce time lags. This effectively ‘blindfolds’ investment decisions and risks wasting effort. The study concludes that understanding lags first requires agreeing models, definitions and measures, which can be applied in practice. A second task would be to develop a process by which to gather these data.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Open Forum Infect Dis
                Open Forum Infect Dis
                ofid
                Open Forum Infectious Diseases
                Oxford University Press (US )
                2328-8957
                October 2021
                11 October 2021
                11 October 2021
                : 8
                : 10
                : ofab434
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Pharmacy Practice and Science, University of Maryland School of Pharmacy , Baltimore, Maryland, USA
                [2 ]Department of Medicine, University of Maryland School of Medicine , Baltimore, Maryland, USA
                [3 ]Department of Medicine, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Jackson Health System , Miami, Florida, USA
                [4 ]Department of Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine , Boston, Massachusetts, USA
                [5 ]Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine , Baltimore, Maryland, USA
                [6 ]Division of Infectious Diseases, Duke Antimicrobial Stewardship Outreach Network , Durham, North Carolina, USA
                [7 ]Department of Quality and Patient Safety, Stanford Antimicrobial Safety and Sustainability Program , Stanford, California, USA
                [8 ]Department of Medicine, Denver Health , Denver, Colorado, USA
                [9 ]Department of Medicine, University of Michigan Medical School , Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
                [10 ]Department of Pharmacy, Oregon Health and Science University , Portland, Oregon, USA
                [11 ]Department of Pharmacy, Parkland Health & Hospital System , Dallas, Texas, USA
                [12 ] Department of Clinical Pharmacy, University of Michigan College of Pharmacy , Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
                [13 ]Department of Medicine, University of Utah School of Medicine , Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
                [14 ]Department of Medicine, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine , Richmond, Virginia, USA
                [15 ]Department of Pharmacy, Virginia Mason Medical Center , Seattle, Washington, USA
                [16 ]Department of Pediatrics, Division of Infectious Diseases, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine , Baltimore, Maryland, USA
                Author notes
                Correspondence: Emily L. Heil, PharmD, MS, Infectious Diseases, Department of Pharmacy Practice and Science, University of Maryland School of Pharmacy, 20 N Pine St, Baltimore, MD 21224 ( eheil@ 123456rx.umaryland.edu ).
                Article
                ofab434
                10.1093/ofid/ofab434
                8561258
                34738022
                f213676a-30ba-427a-8a7a-c07c261eb454
                © The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs licence ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com

                History
                : 26 February 2021
                : 17 August 2021
                : 19 August 2021
                : 11 October 2021
                Page count
                Pages: 7
                Categories
                Major Article
                AcademicSubjects/MED00290

                bacteremia,blood cultures,duration of therapy,oral step-down therapy

                Comments

                Comment on this article