We have located links that may give you full text access.
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
REVIEW
New guidelines for hospital-acquired pneumonia/ventilator-associated pneumonia: USA vs. Europe.
Current Opinion in Critical Care 2018 October
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The International ERS/ESICM/ESCMID/ALAT guidelines for the management of hospital-acquired pneumonia and ventilator-associated pneumonia were published in 2017 whilst the American guidelines for Management of Adults With Hospital-acquired and Ventilator-associated Pneumonia were launched in 2016 by the Infectious Diseases Society of America/ATS. Both guidelines made updated recommendations based on the most recent evidence sharing not only some parallelisms but also important conceptual differences.
RECENT FINDINGS: Contemporary therapy for hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) and ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) emphasizes the importance of prompt and appropriate antimicrobial therapy. There is an implicit risk, when appropriate means broad spectrum, that liberal use of antimicrobial combinations will encourage the emergence of multidrug resistant (MDR), extensively drug-resistant (XDR) and pandrug-resistant bacteria (PDR) and generate untreatable infections, including carbapenemase resistant infections.
SUMMARY: American and European guidelines have many areas of common agreement such as limiting antibiotic duration. Both guidelines were in favour of a close clinical assessment. Neither recommended a regular use of biomarkers but only in specific circumstances such as dealing with MDR and treatment failure. Risk factor prediction for MDR differed and whilst American guidelines focus on organ failure, the European ones did it in local ecology and septic shock.
RECENT FINDINGS: Contemporary therapy for hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) and ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) emphasizes the importance of prompt and appropriate antimicrobial therapy. There is an implicit risk, when appropriate means broad spectrum, that liberal use of antimicrobial combinations will encourage the emergence of multidrug resistant (MDR), extensively drug-resistant (XDR) and pandrug-resistant bacteria (PDR) and generate untreatable infections, including carbapenemase resistant infections.
SUMMARY: American and European guidelines have many areas of common agreement such as limiting antibiotic duration. Both guidelines were in favour of a close clinical assessment. Neither recommended a regular use of biomarkers but only in specific circumstances such as dealing with MDR and treatment failure. Risk factor prediction for MDR differed and whilst American guidelines focus on organ failure, the European ones did it in local ecology and septic shock.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app