Effect of an Educational Intervention on the Management of Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Background: The publication of guidelines for the management of ventilator-associated pneumonia prompted an evaluation of management of this condition in the intensive care unit (ICU) of a community acute care hospital. Objectives: To evaluate the management of ventilatorassociated pneumonia before and after an educational intervention for physicians and to determine the pathogens responsible for this condition among patients in this ICU. Methods: The management of ventilator-associated pneumonia was reviewed, and compliance with published guidelines and with clinically appropriate therapy (in terms of subsequent culture results or local practice) was evaluated for the 7 months before and the 6 months after the 1-week educational intervention. Results: A total of 42 episodes of ventilator-associated pneumonia, which occurred in 37 patients, were evaluated. After the educational intervention, the following changes in end points were observed: appropriate selection of empiric antibiotic therapy according to guidelines increased from 35% of episodes before to 59% of episodes after the intervention (p = 0.11), whereas the selection of empiric therapy subsequently deemed to be clinically appropriate increased from 45% to 77% (p = 0.032); appropriate dosing according to guidelines increased from 20% to 33% (p = 0.33), whereas clinically appropriate dosing increased from 70% to 95% (p = 0.027); appropriate route of therapy according to the guidelines increased from 75% to 82% (p = 0.59) but there was no change in clinically appropriate route of therapy (100% in both phases); timeliness of therapy increased from 85% to 91% (p = 0.56), de-escalation (narrowing of empiric therapy on the basis of culture results) increased from 60% to 100% (p = 0.11), and appropriate duration of therapy decreased from 79% to 55% (p = 0.11). Conclusions: Clinically appropriate selection and dosing of antibiotics for ventilator-associated pneumonia improved after the educational intervention for physicians. The availability of local microbiological data was valuable in guiding empiric antibiotic selection. RESUME Contexte : L’accessibilite aux lignes directrices en matiere de traitement des cas de pneumonie sous ventilation assistee a incite une evaluation du traitement de ces cas dans une unite de soins intensifs d’un hopital communautaire de soins de courte duree. Objectifs : Evaluer le traitement des cas de pneumonie sous ventilation assistee avant et apres une intervention formative aupres des medecins et identifier les agents pathogenes responsables de ces cas a l’unite de soins intensifs. Methodologie : Nous avons examine le mode de traitement des cas de pneumonie sous ventilation assistee, la conformite aux lignes directrices publiees et la pertinence du traitement en fonction de la situation clinique (suivant les resultats de culture subsequents ou l’usage local) pendant sept mois avant l’intervention formative d’une semaine et pendant les six mois qui ont suivi. Resultats : Nous avons evalue un total de 42 episodes de pneumonie sous ventilation assistee chez 37 patients. Nous avons observe les changements suivants des criteres d’evaluation apres l’intervention : le choix de l’antibiotherapie empirique appropriee selon les lignes directrices a augmente, passant de 35 % des episodes avant l’intervention a 59 % des episodes apres l’intervention (p = 0,11), alors que le choix du traitement empirique juge ulterieurement pertinent en fonction de la situation clinique a monte de 45 % a 77 % (p = 0,032); la posologie appropriee selon les lignes directrices a augmente, passant de 20 % a 33 % (p = 0,33), tandis que la bonne posologie en fonction de la situation clinique a monte de 70 % a 95 % (p = 0,027); le choix de la voie de traitement appropriee selon les lignes directrices a augmente, passant de 75 % a 82 % (p = 0,59), mais il n’y a eu aucun changement dans le pourcentage du choix de la bonne voie de traitement en fonction de la situation clinique (100 % dans les deux phases); l’opportunite du traitement a augmente, passant de 85 % a 91 % (p = 0,56), de meme que la desescalade (la restriction du traitement empirique suivant les resultats de culture), passant de 60 % a 100 % (p = 0,11); la duree appropriee du traitement a chute de 79 % a 55 % (p = 0,11). Conclusions : Il y a eu une amelioration dans le choix approprie du traitement en fonction de la situation clinique et dans la posologie des antibiotiques pour les cas de pneumonie sous ventilation assistee apres l’intervention formative aupres des medecins. L’acces aux donnees microbiologiques locales a ete d’une grande utilite pour guider le choix de l’antibiotherapie empirique.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".