4.2 Article

Bloodstream Infections Associated With Parenteral Nutrition Preparation Methods in the United States: A Retrospective, Large Database Analysis

期刊

JOURNAL OF PARENTERAL AND ENTERAL NUTRITION
卷 36, 期 2, 页码 169-176

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1177/0148607111414714

关键词

bloodstream; compounding; infection; multichamber bag; parenteral nutrition

资金

  1. Baxter Healthcare

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: The incidence of bloodstream infection (BSI) among patients receiving parenteral nutrition (PN) is reported to vary widely from 1.3%-39%. BSI rates in a large inpatient population were compared in this study to determine if PN prepared by different methods was associated with BSI. Methods: Data from Premier Perspective, the largest inpatient cost-based clinical and financial claims database in the United States, were analyzed. Included were all hospitalized patients age >= 18 years who received any PN from January 1, 2005, to December 31, 2007. BSI rates, the primary dependent variable, were defined as the occurrence ICD-9 codes of 038.x (septicemia), 995.91 (sepsis), 995.92 (severe sepsis), and 790.7 (bacteremia). The exposure cohort received PN in a commercial multichamber bag (MCB) (n = 4669), whereas the comparator group received PN prepared by a pharmacy (either hospital compounded or outsourced; n = 64,315). Observed data were adjusted using multivariate logistic regression for baseline differences, risk factors, and potential confounders, with propensity score matching as a sensitivity analysis. Results: The observed and adjusted BSI rates indicate that MCB is associated with fewer infections than pharmacy-prepared PN (observed 17.5% vs 26.6%; adjusted 19.6% vs 25.9%, both P < .001). Propensity-matched scores found similar results with observed BSI rates of 18.9% in patients receiving MCB and 24.6% in patients receiving a compounded PN. Conclusion: Both the observed rate of BSI and adjusted probability of developing a BSI remained significantly lower for the MCB than the compounded PN group. (JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2012; 36: 169-176)

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据