Abstract
Background:
Hospice patients are frequently confronted with potentially infectious complications necessitating antibiotic consideration. Information regarding the appropriate use of antibiotics and their impact on symptom management in hospice patients are unknown.
Objectives:
This study aimed to evaluate and describe the use of an antibiotic initiation tool in patients admitted to outpatient hospice services. The primary outcome assessed the percentage of antibiotics that were appropriately initiated based on Loeb’s Minimum Criteria (LMC) for Antibiotic Initiation Tool. Secondary outcomes included the number of patients with documented symptom resolution following antibiotic completion, the number of antibiotic courses that were successfully completed, and treatment-related adverse events.
Methods:
This was a retrospective, multisite, descriptive analysis of hospice patients treated with antibiotics between April 2019 and September 2020.
Results:
Two hundred and thirty patients were assessed for inclusion, with 172 meeting eligibility criteria and receiving a total of 201 antibiotic courses. Based on LMC, 84 of the 201 (42%) antibiotics ordered were appropriate, with 60% of these LMC-approved courses resulting in symptom resolution. Out of 201 total courses, 99 (49%) resulted in symptom resolution. Overall, 160 (80%) antibiotic courses were successfully completed.
Conclusion:
In this study, antibiotic initiation in hospice patients frequently did not meet LMC. Less than half of the antibiotics prescribed led to symptom resolution despite antibiotic course completion in most patients. There is no consensus or guidelines directing appropriate antibiotic decision-making in hospice patients. The appropriate use of antibiotics in terminally ill patients warrants additional research.
Keywords
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
