Author:
Ricotta Emily E.,Olivier Kenneth N.,Lai Yi Ling,Prevots D. Rebecca,Adjemian Jennifer
Abstract
Treatment guidelines exist for pulmonary Mycobacterium avium complex (MAC) infection, although studies suggest poor concordance in clinician practice. Using a national database including hospital encounters of laboratory-confirmed MAC patients, we sought to characterise US treatment practices.We assessed patients in the Premier Healthcare Database from 2009 to 2013 with two or more MAC-positive cultures or one MAC-positive culture and the International Classification of Diseases (9th revision) code for pulmonary nontuberculous mycobacteria (PNTM). Treatment was characterised by patient-, provider- and facility-level factors; significant differences were assessed (p<0.05). Multilevel Poisson regression estimated adjusted relative risks (aRR) of receiving guidelines-based or macrolide resistance-promoting regimens.Of 1326 MAC patients, 645 (49%) received treatment: 10% received guidelines-based treatment and 18% resistance-associated therapy. Patients were more likely to receive guidelines-based therapy if they had multiple hospital encounters (aRR 1.5), codes for PNTM (aRR 5.7) or tuberculosis (aRR 4.5) or radiological procedures (aRR 10.9); multiple hospital encounters (aRR 0.8) or a tuberculosis code (aRR 0.1) were less likely to be associated with receiving resistance-promoting regimens.In hospital-based MAC patients, half received antibiotics active against MAC, a low proportion received therapy based on MAC guidelines and many received antibiotics that promote macrolide resistance. Improved implementation of guidelines-based treatment is needed to decrease use of regimens associated with macrolide resistance.
Funder
National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
Division of Intramural Research, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases
Publisher
European Respiratory Society (ERS)
Subject
Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
Cited by
3 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献