Current practice of antibiotic utilization for renal colic in the emergency room

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Hinck,Bryan
Data de Publicação: 2017
Outros Autores: Larson,Benjamin, De,Shubha, Monga,Manoj
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: International Braz J Urol (Online)
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1677-55382017000200239
Resumo: ABSTRACT Introduction Urinalysis (UA) in the emergency setting for patients with nephrolithiasis produces potentially confusing results leading to treatment of presumed urinary tract infections (UTIs). Our objective was to evaluate the use of antibiotics in patients with nephrolithiasis in a large network of emergency departments (EDs). Methods A retrospective analysis of all ED visits associated with an ICD-9 diagnosis of nephrolithiasis and a CT scan between 2010 and 2013 was performed. Urinalysis data, the use of IV and PO antibiotics during the ED visit and at discharge were assessed. The presence of fever, elevated serum WBCs, >5 WBCs per hpf, and/or dip positive nitrites were used as appropriate criteria for antibiotic use. Results Urinalysis data were available for 3,518 (70%) of 5,035 patients with an ED diagnosis of nephrolithiasis and CT imaging. Of these visits, 237 patients had positive nitrites (6.7%) and 864 had >5 WBCs per hpf (24.6%) with 158 (4.5%) having both findings for a total of 943 patients. Intravenous antibiotics were given to 244 patients (25.9%) and oral antibiotics were given to 629 patients (66.7 %) with positive UA findings. Of the 2,440 patients with a negative UA and no leukocytosis or fever, 86 patients (3.5%) received IV antibiotics and 533 patients (21.8%) received PO antibiotics upon discharge. Conclusions Proper treatment of nephrolithiasis in the ED includes the screening and diagnosis of concomitant UTIs. However, correct interpretation of UA studies is vital to the correct implementation of antibiotic therapy. This study suggests that 1/3 of patients were undertreated and 21.8% were over-treated.
id SBU-1_137ad4dd5550f1e1a1579c0fd5433853
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S1677-55382017000200239
network_acronym_str SBU-1
network_name_str International Braz J Urol (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Current practice of antibiotic utilization for renal colic in the emergency roomAntibiotic ProphylaxisRenal ColicEmergenciesABSTRACT Introduction Urinalysis (UA) in the emergency setting for patients with nephrolithiasis produces potentially confusing results leading to treatment of presumed urinary tract infections (UTIs). Our objective was to evaluate the use of antibiotics in patients with nephrolithiasis in a large network of emergency departments (EDs). Methods A retrospective analysis of all ED visits associated with an ICD-9 diagnosis of nephrolithiasis and a CT scan between 2010 and 2013 was performed. Urinalysis data, the use of IV and PO antibiotics during the ED visit and at discharge were assessed. The presence of fever, elevated serum WBCs, >5 WBCs per hpf, and/or dip positive nitrites were used as appropriate criteria for antibiotic use. Results Urinalysis data were available for 3,518 (70%) of 5,035 patients with an ED diagnosis of nephrolithiasis and CT imaging. Of these visits, 237 patients had positive nitrites (6.7%) and 864 had >5 WBCs per hpf (24.6%) with 158 (4.5%) having both findings for a total of 943 patients. Intravenous antibiotics were given to 244 patients (25.9%) and oral antibiotics were given to 629 patients (66.7 %) with positive UA findings. Of the 2,440 patients with a negative UA and no leukocytosis or fever, 86 patients (3.5%) received IV antibiotics and 533 patients (21.8%) received PO antibiotics upon discharge. Conclusions Proper treatment of nephrolithiasis in the ED includes the screening and diagnosis of concomitant UTIs. However, correct interpretation of UA studies is vital to the correct implementation of antibiotic therapy. This study suggests that 1/3 of patients were undertreated and 21.8% were over-treated.Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia2017-04-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1677-55382017000200239International braz j urol v.43 n.2 2017reponame:International Braz J Urol (Online)instname:Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia (SBU)instacron:SBU10.1590/s1677-5538.ibju.2016.0123info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessHinck,BryanLarson,BenjaminDe,ShubhaMonga,Manojeng2017-04-11T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S1677-55382017000200239Revistahttp://www.brazjurol.com.br/ONGhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||brazjurol@brazjurol.com.br1677-61191677-5538opendoar:2017-04-11T00:00International Braz J Urol (Online) - Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia (SBU)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Current practice of antibiotic utilization for renal colic in the emergency room
title Current practice of antibiotic utilization for renal colic in the emergency room
spellingShingle Current practice of antibiotic utilization for renal colic in the emergency room
Hinck,Bryan
Antibiotic Prophylaxis
Renal Colic
Emergencies
title_short Current practice of antibiotic utilization for renal colic in the emergency room
title_full Current practice of antibiotic utilization for renal colic in the emergency room
title_fullStr Current practice of antibiotic utilization for renal colic in the emergency room
title_full_unstemmed Current practice of antibiotic utilization for renal colic in the emergency room
title_sort Current practice of antibiotic utilization for renal colic in the emergency room
author Hinck,Bryan
author_facet Hinck,Bryan
Larson,Benjamin
De,Shubha
Monga,Manoj
author_role author
author2 Larson,Benjamin
De,Shubha
Monga,Manoj
author2_role author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Hinck,Bryan
Larson,Benjamin
De,Shubha
Monga,Manoj
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Antibiotic Prophylaxis
Renal Colic
Emergencies
topic Antibiotic Prophylaxis
Renal Colic
Emergencies
description ABSTRACT Introduction Urinalysis (UA) in the emergency setting for patients with nephrolithiasis produces potentially confusing results leading to treatment of presumed urinary tract infections (UTIs). Our objective was to evaluate the use of antibiotics in patients with nephrolithiasis in a large network of emergency departments (EDs). Methods A retrospective analysis of all ED visits associated with an ICD-9 diagnosis of nephrolithiasis and a CT scan between 2010 and 2013 was performed. Urinalysis data, the use of IV and PO antibiotics during the ED visit and at discharge were assessed. The presence of fever, elevated serum WBCs, >5 WBCs per hpf, and/or dip positive nitrites were used as appropriate criteria for antibiotic use. Results Urinalysis data were available for 3,518 (70%) of 5,035 patients with an ED diagnosis of nephrolithiasis and CT imaging. Of these visits, 237 patients had positive nitrites (6.7%) and 864 had >5 WBCs per hpf (24.6%) with 158 (4.5%) having both findings for a total of 943 patients. Intravenous antibiotics were given to 244 patients (25.9%) and oral antibiotics were given to 629 patients (66.7 %) with positive UA findings. Of the 2,440 patients with a negative UA and no leukocytosis or fever, 86 patients (3.5%) received IV antibiotics and 533 patients (21.8%) received PO antibiotics upon discharge. Conclusions Proper treatment of nephrolithiasis in the ED includes the screening and diagnosis of concomitant UTIs. However, correct interpretation of UA studies is vital to the correct implementation of antibiotic therapy. This study suggests that 1/3 of patients were undertreated and 21.8% were over-treated.
publishDate 2017
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2017-04-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1677-55382017000200239
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1677-55382017000200239
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1590/s1677-5538.ibju.2016.0123
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv International braz j urol v.43 n.2 2017
reponame:International Braz J Urol (Online)
instname:Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia (SBU)
instacron:SBU
instname_str Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia (SBU)
instacron_str SBU
institution SBU
reponame_str International Braz J Urol (Online)
collection International Braz J Urol (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv International Braz J Urol (Online) - Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia (SBU)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv ||brazjurol@brazjurol.com.br
_version_ 1750318075413004288