Time filter

Source Type

Melbourne, Australia

Cross G.,Infectious Disease Unit | Bilgrami I.,Intensive Care Unit | Eastwood G.,Deakin University | Eastwood G.,Monash University | And 5 more authors.
Anaesthesia and Intensive Care | Year: 2015

In a three-month retrospective study, we assessed the proportion of rapid response team (RRT) calls associated with systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) and sepsis. We also documented the site of infection (whether it was community-or hospital-acquired), antibiotic modifications after the call and in-hospital outcomes. Amongst 358 RRT calls, two or more SIRS criteria were present in 277 (77.4%). Amongst the 277 RRT calls with SIRS criteria, 159 (57.4%) fulfilled sepsis criteria in the 24 hours before and 12 hours after the call. There were 118 of 277 (42.6%) calls with SIRS criteria but no evidence of sepsis and 62 of 277 (22.3%) calls associated with both criteria for sepsis as well as an alternative cause for SIRS. Hence, 159 (44.4%) of all 358 RRT calls over the three-month study period fulfilled criteria for sepsis and in 97 (159-62) (27.1%) of the 358 calls, there were criteria for sepsis without other causes for SIRS criteria. The most common sites of infection were respiratory tract (86), abdominal cavity (38), urinary tract (26) and bloodstream (26). Infection was hospital-acquired in 91 (57.2%) and community-acquired in 67 (42.1%) cases, respectively. Patients were on antibiotics in 127 of 159 (79.9%) cases before the RRT call and antibiotics were added or modified in 76 of 159 (47.8%) cases after RRT review. The hospital length-of-stay of patients who received an RRT call associated with sepsis was longer than those who did not (16.0 [8.0 to 28.5] versus 10 [6.0 to 18.0]; P=0.002).

Dulhunty J.M.,University of Queensland | Roberts J.A.,University of Queensland | Roberts J.A.,National Health and Medical Research Council Career Development | Davis J.S.,Charles Darwin University | And 13 more authors.
Critical Care and Resuscitation | Year: 2013

Background and rationale: Beta-lactam antibiotics are largely administered by bolus dosing, despite displaying time-dependent pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics and there being a strong rationale for continuous administration. The randomised controlled trials conducted to date comparing the mode of beta-lactam administration have been inconclusive and limited by non-equivalent dosing, unblinded administration and small sample sizes. Objective: A multicentre, randomised controlled trial (the Beta-lactam Infusion Group [BLING] II study) is currently under way, comparing continuous infusion to standard bolus administration of beta-lactam antibiotics in critically ill patients, independent of dose. Design, settings, participants and interventions: BLING II is a Phase IIB, double-blinded, randomised controlled trial recruiting 420 intensive care unit patients with severe sepsis to receive one of three beta-lactam study antibiotics (ticarcillin-clavulanate, piperacillin-tazobactam or meropenem) by either continuous infusion or intermittent bolus administration. Main outcome measures: The primary outcome is ICU-free days at Day 28. Secondary outcomes include 90-day survival, clinical cure 14 days after study antibiotic cessation, organ failure-free days at Day 14 and duration of bacteraemia. Results and conclusions: The study started in July 2012 and will provide clinical evidence as to whether continuous infusion of beta-lactam antibiotics is superior to intermittent bolus administration in critically ill patients with severe sepsis. A Phase III study powered for a survival end point may be justified, based on the results of our study.

Discover hidden collaborations