Cited by 235Nosocomial Infections in ICUAntibiotic Use and ResistancePneumonia and Respiratory Infections

Implementation of guidelines for management of possible multidrug-resistant pneumonia in intensive care: An observational, multicentre cohort study.

Open access
Kett, Daniel H, Cano, Ennie, Quartin, Andrew A, Mangino, Julie E, Zervos, Marcus J, Peyrani, Paula, Cely, Cynthia M, Ford, Kimbal D +2 more·2011·The Lancet Infectious Diseases

Abstract

Background The American Thoracic Society and Infectious Diseases Society of America provide guidelines for management of hospital-acquired, ventilator-associated, and health-care-associated pneumonias, consisting of empirical antibiotic regimens for patients at risk for multidrug-resistant pathogens. We aimed to improve compliance with these guidelines and assess outcomes.Methods We implemented a performance-improvement initiative in four academic medical centres in the USA with protocol-based education and prospective observation of outcomes. Patients were assessed for severity of illness and followed up until death, hospital discharge, or day 28. We included patients in intensive-care units who were at risk for multidrug-resistant pneumonia and were treated empirically.Findings 303 patients at risk for multidrug-resistant pneumonia were treated empirically, and prescribed treatment was guideline compliant in 129 patients and non-compliant in 174 patients. 44 (34%) patients died before 28 days in the compliance group and 35 (20%) died in the non-compliance group. Five patients in the compliance group and seven in the non-compliance group were lost to follow-up after day 14. Kaplan-Meier estimated survival to 28 days was 65% in the compliance group and 79% in the non-compliance group (p=0·0042). This difference persisted after adjustment for severity of illness. Median length of stay and duration of mechanical ventilation did not differ between groups. Compliance failures included non-use of dual treatment for Gram-negative pathogens in 154 patients and absence of meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus coverage in 24 patients. For patients in whom pathogens were subsequently identified, empirical treatment was active in 79 (81%) of 97 of patients receiving compliant therapy compared with 109 (85%) of 128 of patients receiving non-compliant therapy.Interpretation Because adherence with empirical treatment was associated with increased mortality, we recommend a randomised trial be done before further implementation of these guidelines.Funding Pfizer, US Medical.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s1473-3099(10)70314-5

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kett, D. H., Cano, E., Quartin, A. A., Mangino, J. E., Zervos, M. J., Peyrani, P., Cely, C. M., Ford, K. D., Scerpella, E. G., & Ramirez, J. A.
Affiliations
  • University of Miami (US)
  • The Ohio State University (US)
  • Henry Ford Health (US)
  • University of Louisville (US)
  • Pfizer (United States) (US)
Corresponding author
Kett, Daniel H
Venue
The Lancet Infectious Diseases
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2011-03
Volume
11
Issue
3
Pages
181-189
ISSN
1473-3099 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2137837217
Cited by
235
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 30 · 2013: 23 · 2012: 25
FWCI
25.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Lancet Infectious Diseases (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine › Nosocomial Infections in ICU
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology › Antibiotic Use and Resistance
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Pneumonia and Respiratory Infections
Keywords
empirical antibiotic therapy, guideline adherence, intensive care, ventilator-associated pneumonia, nosocomial pneumonia, healthcare-associated pneumonia, 28-day mortality, performance improvement, Gram-negative pathogens, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, length of hospital stay, mechanical ventilation duration
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Cross Infection, Humans, Intensive Care Units, Middle Aged, Societies, Medical, Cohort Studies, Treatment Outcome, Practice Guidelines as Topic, Pneumonia, Bacterial, Drug Resistance, Multiple, Bacterial, Pneumonia, Ventilator-Associated, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review