Hospital-Wide Protocol Significantly Improved Appropriate Management of Patients with Staphylococcus aureus Bloodstream Infection
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Results
2.1. Demographic Characteristics
2.2. Clinical Characteristics
2.3. Process Measures after Implementation of SA-BSI Treatment Protocol
2.3.1. Nonpharmacologic Management
2.3.2. Pharmacologic Management
Antibiotic Prescription
Appropriateness of Antibiotic Prescription
2.4. Outcomes Measures after Implementation of SA-BSI Treatment Protocol
2.5. Post Hoc Analysis
3. Discussion
4. Materials and Methods
- ID specialists developed a hospital-wide SA-BSI management protocol. The protocol was adapted from evidence-based data and standard treatment guidelines [20,21,22,23]. The treatment protocol is shown in Supplementary Materials Figure S1;
- A conference with the primary care team who had a role in the treatment of SA-BSI was held at the Department of Internal Medicine, Surgery, and Orthopedics. The conference described the appropriate management of SA-BSI and explained how to follow the hospital-wide SA-BSI management protocol;
- The protocol was available at the point of care;
- We monthly reminded the staff of the treatment protocol in patient care team conferences.
- MSSA is S. aureus that is susceptible to methicillin;
- MRSA is S. aureus that is resistant to methicillin.S. aureus isolates were tested using a disk diffusion method following the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) guidelines, M02-A12 (CLSI, 2015), against four antibiotics, namely, erythromycin (15 μg), clindamycin (2 μg), oxacillin (30 μg cefoxitin as a surrogate drug) with a zone diameter ≥22 mm interpreted as methicillin-susceptible (MS) and ≤21 mm as methicillin-resistant (MR), and trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole (1.25 μg/23.75 μg), (Becton, Dickinson and Company, Franklin Lakes, NJ, USA) [24].
- Complicated SA-BSI: SA-BSI with one of the following: (1) infective endocarditis; (2) bone and joint infections; (3) metastatic foci of infections, e.g., deep organ abscess; (4) neutropenia; (5) persistent bacteremia after 72 h of appropriate antibiotics; (6) persistent fever after 72 h despite appropriate antibiotic; (7) cardiovascular implantable electronic device (CIED) infection; (8) unable to remove central venous catheter [23].
- The appropriateness of antibiotic prescription was defined as all of the following: right drug, right dose, right route, and right duration for treatment of SA-BSI accounting for history of drug allergy and intolerance.
5. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Hassoun, A.; Linden, P.K.; Friedman, B. Incidence, prevalence, and management of MRSA bacteremia across patient populations-a review of recent developments in MRSA management and treatment. Crit. Care 2017, 21, 211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Van Hal, S.J.; Jensen, S.O.; Vaska, V.L.; Espedido, B.A.; Paterson, D.L.; Gosbell, I.B. Predictors of mortality in Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 2012, 25, 362–386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Bassetti, M.; Righi, E.; Del Giacomo, P.; Sartor, A.; Ansaldi, F.; Trucchi, C.; Alicino, C.; Trecarichi, E.M.; Spanu, T.; Paganino, C.; et al. Predictors of Mortality with Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia in Elderly Adults. J. Am. Geriatr. Soc. 2018, 66, 1284–1289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Yilmaz, M.; Elaldi, N.; Balkan, I.I.; Arslan, F.; Batırel, A.A.; Bakıcı, M.Z.; Gozel, M.G.; Alkan, S.; Çelik, A.D.; Yetkin, M.A.; et al. Mortality predictors of Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia: A prospective multicenter study. Ann. Clin. Microbiol. Antimicrob. 2016, 15, 7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Hadano, Y.; Kakuma, T.; Matsumoto, T.; Ishibashi, K.; Isoda, M.; Yasunaga, H. Reduction of 30-day death rates from Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia by mandatory infectious diseases consultation: Comparative study interventions with and without an infectious disease specialist. Int. J. Infect. Dis. 2021, 103, 308–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bai, A.; Showler, A.; Burry, L.; Steinberg, M.; Ricciuto, D.R.; Fernandes, T.; Chiu, A.; Raybardhan, S.; Science, M.; Fernando, E.; et al. Impact of Infectious Disease Consultation on Quality of Care, Mortality, and Length of Stay in Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia: Results From a Large Multicenter Cohort Study. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2015, 60, 1451–1461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Berger, N.J.; Wright, M.E.; Pouliot, J.D.; Green, M.W.; Armstrong, D.K. The Impact of a Pharmacist-Driven Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia Initiative in a Community Hospital: A Retrospective Cohort Analysis. Pharmacy 2021, 9, 191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bolhuis, K.; Bakker, L.J.; Keijer, J.T.; de Vries, P.J. Implementing a hospital-wide protocol for Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Eur. J. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 2018, 37, 1553–1562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Townsend, J.; Pelletier, J.; Peterson, G.; Matulevicius, S.; Sreeramoju, P. Quality Improvement of Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia Management and Predictors of Relapse-free Survival. Am. J. Med. 2016, 129, 195–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Pragman, A.A.; Kuskowski, M.A.; Abraham, J.M.; Filice, G.A. Infectious Disease Consultation for Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia Improves Patient Management and Outcomes. Infect. Dis. Clin. Pract. 2012, 20, 261–267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Borde, J.P.; Batin, N.; Rieg, S.; Feik, R.; Reimling, C.; Kern, W.V.; De With, K.; Hübner, J.; Ruhnke, M.; Kaier, K. Adherence to an antibiotic stewardship bundle targeting Staphylococcus aureus blood stream infections at a 200-bed community hospital. Infection 2014, 42, 713–719. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Fowler, V.G., Jr.; Sanders, L.L.; Sexton, D.J.; Kong, L.; Marr, K.A.; Gopal, A.K.; Gottlieb, G.; McClelland, R.S.; Corey, G.R. Outcome of Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia according to compliance with recommendations of infectious diseases specialists: Experience with 244 patients. Clin. Infect. Dis. 1998, 27, 478–486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Laupland, K.B.; Steele, L.; Pasquill, K.; Parfitt, E.C. Staphylococcus aureus bloodstream infection: Secular changes associated with the implementation of a de novo clinical infectious diseases service in a Canadian population. Int. J. Infect. Dis. 2021, 104, 45–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Nguyen, C.T.; Gandhi, T.; Chenoweth, C.; Lassiter, J.; Dela-Pena, J.; Eschenauer, G.; Nagel, J.L. Impact of an antimicrobial stewardship-led intervention for Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia: A quasi-experimental study. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 2015, 70, 3390–3396. [Google Scholar] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Sonneville, R.; Verdonk, F.; Rauturier, C.; Klein, I.F.; Wolff, M.; Annane, D.; Chretien, F.; Sharshar, T. Understanding brain dysfunction in sepsis. Ann. Intensiv. Care 2013, 3, 15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Williams, M.D.; Braun, L.A.; Cooper, L.M.; Johnston, J.; Weiss, R.V.; Qualy, R.L.; Linde-Zwirble, W. Hospitalized cancer patients with severe sepsis: Analysis of incidence, mortality, and associated costs of care. Crit. Care 2004, 8, R291–R298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Atrash, A.K.; de Vasconcellos, K. Low albumin levels are associated with mortality in the critically ill: A retrospective observational study in a multidisciplinary intensive care unit. S. Afr. J. Crit. Care 2020, 36, 74–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De la Calle, C.; Morata, L.; Cobos-Trigueros, N.; Martinez, J.A.; Cardozo, C.; Mensa, J.; Soriano, A. Staphylococcus aureus bacteremic pneumonia. Eur. J. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 2016, 35, 497–502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Martínez, M.L.; Ferrer, R.; Torrents, E.; Guillamat-Prats, R.; Gomà, G.; Suárez, D.; Álvarez-Rocha, L.; Pozo-Laderas, J.-C.; Martin-Loeches, I.; Levy, M.M.; et al. Impact of Source Control in Patients With Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock. Crit. Care Med. 2017, 45, 11–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chong, Y.P.; Moon, S.M.; Bang, K.-M.; Park, H.J.; Park, S.-Y.; Kim, M.-N.; Park, K.-H.; Kim, S.-H.; Lee, S.-O.; Choi, S.-H.; et al. Treatment duration for uncomplicated Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia to prevent relapse: Analysis of a prospective observational cohort study. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2013, 57, 1150–1156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Holland, T.L.; Arnold, C.; Fowler, V.G., Jr. Clinical management of Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia: A review. JAMA 2014, 312, 1330–1341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Liu, C.; Bayer, A.; Cosgrove, S.E.; Daum, R.S.; Fridkin, S.K.; Gorwitz, R.J.; Kaplan, S.L.; Karchmer, A.W.; Levine, D.P.; Murray, B.E.; et al. Clinical practice guidelines by the infectious diseases society of america for the treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections in adults and children. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2011, 52, e18–e55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Mermel, L.A.; Allon, M.; Bouza, E.; Craven, D.E.; Flynn, P.; O’Grady, N.P.; Raad, I.I.; Rijnders, B.J.A.; Sherertz, R.J.; Warren, D.K. Clinical practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of intravascular catheter-related infection: 2009 Update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2009, 49, 1–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI). Performance Standards for Antimicrobial Disk Susceptibility Tests; Approved Standard, 12th ed.; CLSI document M02-A12; Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute: Wayne, PA, USA, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Spivak, E.S.; Cosgrove, S.E.; Srinivasan, A. Measuring Appropriate Antimicrobial Use: Attempts at Opening the Black Box. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2016, 63, 1639–1644. [Google Scholar]
Demographic Characteristics | Pre-Intervention Period (n = 88) | Post-Intervention Period (n = 81) | p-Value |
---|---|---|---|
Male | 51 (58) | 51 (63) | 0.506 |
Age in years (median, IQR) | 64.5 (56, 71.5) | 63 (50, 72) | 0.195 |
Unit of admission | |||
| 56 (63.6) | 49 (60.5) | 0.674 |
| 11 (12.5) | 15 (18.5) | 0.279 |
| 11 (12.5) | 9 (11.1) | 0.780 |
| 4 (4.5) | 2 (2.5) | 0.683 |
| 5 (5.7) | 6 (7.4) | 0.650 |
| 1 (1.1) | 0 (0) | 1.000 |
Underlying Diseases | 79 (89.8) | 72 (88.9) | 0.852 |
| 36 (45.6) | 39 (54.2) | 0.344 |
| 31 (39.2) | 35 (48.6) | 0.288 |
| 28 (35.4) | 29 (40.3) | 0.584 |
| 17 (21.5) | 17 (23.6) | 0.787 |
| 14 (17.7) | 10 (13.9) | 0.507 |
| 11 (13.9) | 9 (12.5) | 0.780 |
| 6 (7.6) | 8 (11.1) | 0.471 |
| 4 (5.1) | 3 (4.2) | 1.000 |
| 2 (2.5) | 3 (4.2) | 0.671 |
| 0 (0) | 3 (4.2) | 0.108 |
Prior hospitalization within 90 days | 31 (35.2) | 32 (39.5) | 0.565 |
Prior antibiotics use within 90 days | 19 (21.6) | 19 (23.5) | 0.772 |
Beta-lactams | |||
| 1 (1.1) | 3 (3.7) | 0.284 |
| 2 (2.2) | 2 (2.5) | 1.000 |
| 1 (1.1) | 0 (0) | 1.000 |
| 7 (8.0) | 5 (6.2) | 0.768 |
| 5 (5.7) | 4 (4.9) | 1.000 |
| 2 (2.3) | 6 (7.4) | 0.153 |
| 1 (1.1) | 1 (1.2) | 1.000 |
| 6 (6.8) | 4 (4.9) | 0.749 |
Other groups of antibiotics | |||
| 6 (6.8) | 3 (3.7) | 0.499 |
| 3 (3.4) | 2 (2.5) | 0.717 |
Medical devices | 28 (31.8) | 25 (30.9) | 1.000 |
| 17 (19.3) | 19 (23.5) | 0.512 |
| 3 (3.4) | 3 (3.7) | 1.000 |
| 5 (5.7) | 3 (3.7) | 0.459 |
| 3 (3.4) | 0 (0) | 0.247 |
| 1 (1.1) | 2 (2.5) | 0.608 |
| 1 (1.1) | 1(1.2) | 1.000 |
| 1 (1.1) | 0 (0) | 1.000 |
| 0 (0) | 2 (2.5) | 0.228 |
| 0 (0) | 1 (1.2) | 0.479 |
Clinical Characteristics and Laboratory Findings | Pre-Intervention Period (n = 88) | Post-Intervention Period (n = 81) | p-Value |
---|---|---|---|
Concurrent site of infection | |||
| 22 (25.0) | 14 (17.3) | 0.261 |
| 15 (17.1) | 20 (24.7) | 0.257 |
| 12 (13.6) | 18 (22.2) | 0.162 |
| 9 (10.2) | 15 (18.5) | 0.130 |
| 13 (14.5) | 9 (11.1) | 0.503 |
| 9 (10.2) | 6 (7.4) | 0.595 |
| 1 (1.1) | 2 (2.5) | 0.608 |
| 1 (1.1) | 3 (3.7) | 0.351 |
| 9 (11.1) | 9 (10.2) | 1.000 |
Signs | |||
| 38.4 (37.5, 39) | 38.5 (38, 39.2) | 0.106 |
| 20 (22.7) | 18 (22.2) | 1.000 |
| 32 (36.4) | 18 (22.2) | 0.044 |
| 63 (71.6) | 50 (61.7) | 0.174 |
Laboratory | |||
| 30.3 ± 7.0 | 30.1 ± 7.4 | 0.900 |
| 48 (54.5) | 42 (51.9) | 0.726 |
| 12,575 (7040, 16,435) | 12,160 (8550, 16,690) | 0.934 |
| 86 (75.2, 91.9) | 89 (82.2, 91.5) | 0.095 |
| 178,000 (125,500, 272,500) | 190,000 (122,000, 262,000) | 0.932 |
| 1.5 (0.8, 4.9) | 2.5 (1.0, 6.3) | 0.158 |
| 3.1 (2.6, 3.6) | 3.1 (2.6, 3.7) | 0.906 |
| 13 (14.8) | 15 (18.5) | 0.609 |
| 30 (19, 54) | 23 (13, 33) | 0.023 |
| 0.9 (0.4, 1.6) | 0.7 (0.4, 1.5) | 0.539 |
Complicated bloodstream infection | 30 (34.1) | 32 (29.5) | 0.466 |
Blood culture that grew MSSA | 87 (98.9) | 74 (91.4) | 0.029 |
Vancomycin MIC of MRSA (mg/L) | 1 (n = 1 patient) | 1 (0.5, 1) (n = 7 patients) | 0.564 |
Outcomes | Pre-Intervention Period Total = 88 Cases | Post-Intervention Period Total = 81 Cases | p-Value |
---|---|---|---|
90-day mortality | 30 (34.1) | 22 (27.2) | 0.329 |
Recurrent S. aureus bloodstream infection | 5 (5.7) | 1 (1.2) | 0.213 |
| 0 (0) | 0 (0) | NA |
| 2 (2.3) | 1 (1.2) | 1.000 |
Echocardiography | 62 (70.5) | 74 (91.4) | 0.001 |
| 60 (68.2) | 73 (90.1) | 0.001 |
| 5 (3, 8) (n = 60 patients) | 6 (4, 8) (n = 73 patients) | 0.209 |
| 6 (6.8) | 8 (9.9) | 0.471 |
| 6.5 (6, 8) (n = 6 patients) | 8 (5, 13.5) (n = 8 patients) | 0.788 |
Other radiologic imaging | 16 (18.2) | 32 (39.5) | 0.002 |
| 9 (10.2) | 21 (25.9) | 0.009 |
| 9 (10.2) | 20 (24.7) | 0.013 |
| 0 (0) | 1 (1.2) | 0.479 |
| 5 (5.7) | 12 (14.8) | 0.049 |
| 3 (3.4) | 10 (12.3) | 0.041 |
| 2 (2.3) | 2 (2.5) | 1.000 |
| 6 (6.8) | 6 (7.4) | 1.000 |
| 6 (6.8) | 3 (3.7) | 0.499 |
| 1 (1.1) | 0 (0) | 1.000 |
| 0 (0) | 1 (1.2) | 0.479 |
| 0 (0) | 1 (1.2) | 0.479 |
Source control | 30 (34.1) | 35 (43.2) | 0.223 |
| 13 (14.8) | 12 (14.8) | 0.994 |
| 11 (12.5) | 12 (14.8) | 0.661 |
| 10 (11.4) | 12 (14.8) | 0.505 |
| 3 (3.4) | 0 (0) | 0.247 |
| 0 (0) | 1 (1.2) | 0.479 |
| 0 (0) | 1 (1.2) | 0.479 |
Days of intravenous antibiotics, median (IQR) | 14 (7, 18) | 15 (14, 28) | 0.015 |
| 53 (60.2) | 64 (79) | 0.007 |
Afebrile at 72 h after treatment | 50 (56.8) | 48 (59.3) | 0.271 |
Follow-up blood culture at 72 h after treatment | 73 (83) | 77 (95.1) | 0.013 |
Intravenous antibiotics for treatment of SA-BSI * | |||
| 45 (51.1) | 57 (70.4) | 0.011 |
| 11 (12.5) | 0 | 0.001 |
| 9 (10.2) | 4 (4.9) | 0.197 |
| 10 (11.4) | 2 (2.5) | 0.025 |
| 4 (4.5) | 4 (4.9) | 1.000 |
| 9 (10.2) | 14 (17.3) | 0.181 |
Appropriateness of antibiotics use | 37 (42.0) | 66 (81.5) | <0.001 |
| 64 (72.7) | 75 (92.6) | 0.001 |
| 57 (64.8) | 73 (90.1) | <0.001 |
| 46 (52.3) | 73 (90.1) | <0.001 |
| 75 (85.2) | 78 (96.3) | 0.014 |
Infectious disease (ID) consultation | 44 (50.0) | 46 (56.8) | 0.377 |
ID consultation for complicated bloodstream infection | 26/33 (78.8) | 28/38 (73.7) | 0.781 |
ID consultation for uncomplicated bloodstream infection | 18/55 (32.7) | 18/43 (41.9) | 0.402 |
Characteristics | Patients Who Survived (n = 117) | Patients Who Died (n = 52) | p-Value |
---|---|---|---|
Male | 72 (61.5) | 30 (57.7) | 0.637 |
Age ≥60 years old | 63 (53.8) | 40 (76.9) | 0.005 |
Unit of admission | |||
| 78 (66.7) | 27 (51.9) | 0.068 |
| 9 (7.7) | 17 (32.7) | <0.001 |
| 17 (14.5) | 3 (5.8) | 0.104 |
| 4 (3.4) | 2 (3.8) | 1.000 |
| 8 (6.8) | 3 (5.8) | 0.104 |
Underlying diseases | 102 (87.2) | 49 (94.2) | 0.279 |
| 45 (38.5) | 30 (57.7) | 0.020 |
| 50 (42.7) | 16 (30.8) | 0.141 |
| 38 (32.5) | 19 (36.5) | 0.606 |
| 17 (14.5) | 17 (32.7) | 0.007 |
| 12 (10.3) | 12 (23.1) | 0.028 |
| 10 (8.5) | 10 (19.2) | 0.047 |
| 11 (9.4) | 3 (5.8) | 0.554 |
| 4 (3.4) | 3 (5.0) | 0.677 |
| 2 (1.7) | 2 (3.8) | 0.588 |
Prior hospitalization within 90 days | 44 (37.6) | 19 (36.5) | 0.895 |
Prior antibiotics use within 90 days | 27 (23.1) | 11 (21.2) | 0.782 |
Medical devices | 36 (30.8) | 17 (32.7) | 0.804 |
Concurrent site of infection | |||
| 31 (26.5) | 5 (9.6) | 0.013 |
| 27 (23.1) | 8 (15.4) | 0.255 |
| 14 (12.0) | 16 (30.8) | 0.003 |
| 20 (17.1) | 4 (7.7) | 0.106 |
| 13 (11.1) | 9 (17.3) | 0.269 |
| 9 (10.2) | 6 (7.4) | 0.595 |
| 1 (0.9) | 2 (3.9) | 0.224 |
| 2 (1.7) | 2 (3.9) | 0.588 |
| 14 (12.0) | 4 (7.7) | 0.406 |
Signs | |||
| 38.5 (38, 39) | 38.4 (37.4, 39) | 0.102 |
| 13 (11.1) | 25 (48.1) | <0.001 |
| 31 (35.2) | 19 (23.5) | 0.187 |
| 70 (79.5) | 43 (53.1) | 0.004 |
Laboratory | |||
| 31 (7) | 28.3 (7.3) | 0.023 |
| 57 (48.7) | 33 (63.5) | 0.076 |
| 12,880(8610, 17,230) | 10,690 (6260, 16,420) | 0.004 |
| 87 (78.9, 91.5) | 89 (78.2, 91.8) | 0.967 |
| 192,000 (130,000, 271,000) | 172,500 (87,000, 228,500) | 0.094 |
| 1.4 (0.8, 6.6) | 1.8 (1.1, 3.3) | 0.158 |
| 3.3 (2.7, 3.8) | 2.8 (2.1, 3.3) | <0.001 |
| 11 (9.4) | 17 (32.7) | 0.001 |
| 24 (15.5, 40.5) | 29 (17, 54) | 0.394 |
| 0.6 (0.4, 1.4) | 0.8 (0.5, 2.1) | 0.122 |
Complicated bloodstream infection | 42 (35.9) | 20 (38.5) | 0.750 |
Source control | 53 (45.3) | 12 (23.1) | 0.006 |
| 20 (17.1) | 5 (9.6) | 0.206 |
| 18 (15.4) | 5 (9.6) | 0.024 |
| 20 (17.1) | 2 (3.8) | 0.024 |
| 2 (1.7) | 1 (1.9) | 1.000 |
Days of intravenous antibiotics, median (IQR) | 14.5 (14, 28) | 8 (5, 15) | <0.001 |
| 97 (82.9) | 20 (38.5) | <0.001 |
Follow-up blood culture at 72 h after treatment | 108 (92.3) | 42 (80.8) | 0.028 |
Afebrile at 72 h after treatment | 76 (65.0) | 22 (42.4) | 0.126 |
Appropriateness of antibiotic use | 80 (68.4) | 23 (44.2) | 0.003 |
| 103 (88) | 36 (69.2) | 0.003 |
| 95 (81.2) | 35 (67.3) | 0.048 |
| 95 (81.2) | 24 (46.2) | <0.001 |
| 104 (88.9) | 49 (94.2) | 0.396 |
Infectious disease consultation | 66 (56.4) | 24 (46.2) | 0.217 |
Being in the post-intervention period | 59 (50.4) | 22 (42.3) | 0.329 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Krasaewes, K.; Yasri, S.; Khamnoi, P.; Chaiwarith, R. Hospital-Wide Protocol Significantly Improved Appropriate Management of Patients with Staphylococcus aureus Bloodstream Infection. Antibiotics 2022, 11, 827. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics11060827
Krasaewes K, Yasri S, Khamnoi P, Chaiwarith R. Hospital-Wide Protocol Significantly Improved Appropriate Management of Patients with Staphylococcus aureus Bloodstream Infection. Antibiotics. 2022; 11(6):827. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics11060827
Chicago/Turabian StyleKrasaewes, Kawisara, Saowaluck Yasri, Phadungkiat Khamnoi, and Romanee Chaiwarith. 2022. "Hospital-Wide Protocol Significantly Improved Appropriate Management of Patients with Staphylococcus aureus Bloodstream Infection" Antibiotics 11, no. 6: 827. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics11060827
APA StyleKrasaewes, K., Yasri, S., Khamnoi, P., & Chaiwarith, R. (2022). Hospital-Wide Protocol Significantly Improved Appropriate Management of Patients with Staphylococcus aureus Bloodstream Infection. Antibiotics, 11(6), 827. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics11060827