Rhinologist Use of Antibiotics With Nasal Packing for Epistaxis

被引:3
|
作者
Mallen, Jonathan Ross [1 ,2 ]
Aasen, Davis M. [2 ]
Vuncannon, Jackson Ross [1 ]
Kuo, Chia-Ling [3 ]
Mu, Jinjian [3 ]
Tessema, Belachew [2 ]
Brown, Seth M. [2 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Emory Univ, Sch Med, Dept Otolaryngol Head & Neck Surg, Atlanta, GA USA
[2] Univ Connecticut Hlth, Dept Surg, Div Otolaryngol, Farmington, CT USA
[3] Univ Connecticut Hlth, Connecticut Inst Clin & Translat Sci, Farmington, CT USA
[4] Univ Connecticut, Sch Med, Div Otolaryngol Head & Neck Surg, 263 Farmington Ave, Farmington, CT 06032 USA
关键词
epistaxis; nasal packing; toxic shock syndrome; antibiotic prophylaxis; geographic practice variance; TOXIC-SHOCK-SYNDROME; PROPHYLACTIC ANTIBIOTICS; SURGERY; RISK;
D O I
10.1177/19458924231176394
中图分类号
R76 [耳鼻咽喉科学];
学科分类号
100213 ;
摘要
Background There is limited evidence supporting the usage of prophylactic antibiotics in the setting of nasal packing for epistaxis. It is unclear what current antiobiotic usage patterns are by otolaryngologists. Objectives Characterize the antibiotic prescribing practices employed by otolaryngologists in the management of epistaxis patients treated with packing as well as the underlying rationale. Explore the impact of experience, geography, and academic affiliation on treatment decisions. Methods An anonymous survey of antibiotic prescribing patterns for patients with epistaxis requiring nasal packing was distributed to all physician members of the American Rhinologic Society. Responses to each question were descriptively summarized including 95% confidence intervals and were linked to demographics using Fisher's exact tests. Results One thousand one hundred and thirteen surveys were distributed with 307 responses (27.6%). Antibiotic prescription rates varied based on packing type, with 20.0% prescribing antibiotics for dissolvable packing compared to 84.2% to 84.6% for nondissolvable packing. The absorbance of nondissolvable packing does not impact the decision to prescribe antibiotics (P > .999). Precisely 69.7% (95% CI: 64.0%-74.8%) stop antibiotics immediately following packing removal. Precisely 85.6% (95% CI: 81.6%-89.9%) cite the risk of toxic shock syndrome (TSS) when prescribing antibiotics. Notable regional differences include greater utilization of amoxicillin-clavulanate in the Midwest (67.6%) and Northeast (61.4%) as compared with the South (42.1%) and West (45.1%) (P = .013). Further, years in practice were positively associated with several patterns including prescribing antibiotics for patients with dissolvable packing (P = .008), citing prevention of sinusitis as a rationale for antibiotic use (P < .001), and a higher likelihood of having treated a patient with TSS (P = .002). Conclusions Antibiotic use in patients with epistaxis controlled with nondissolvable packing is common. Treatment patterns are influenced by geography, years in practice, and practice type.
引用
收藏
页码:558 / 562
页数:5
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Is routine nasoendoscopy warranted in epistaxis patients after removal of nasal packing?
    Makarawo, Tafadzwa P.
    Howe, David
    Chan, Samuel K.
    ALLERGY & RHINOLOGY, 2011, 2 (01) : 12 - 15
  • [32] Cerebrospinal fluid rhinorrhoea after nasal packing for epistaxis: case report
    Edkins, O.
    Nyamarebvu, C. T.
    Lubbe, D.
    JOURNAL OF LARYNGOLOGY AND OTOLOGY, 2012, 128 (04): : 421 - 423
  • [33] Nasal self-packing for epistaxis in HHT increases quality of life
    Droege, Freya
    Lang, Stephen
    Geisthoff, Urban
    ANGIOGENESIS, 2015, 18 (04) : 554 - 554
  • [34] How to perform adequate nasal packing in posterior epistaxis with difficult access
    Low, C
    Walshe, P
    Hone, S
    RHINOLOGY, 2003, 41 (03) : 182 - 183
  • [35] Comparison of the effectiveness of nasal packing devices for emergency department treatment of epistaxis
    Lefkowits, D
    Hogle, GA
    Heinz, S
    Cutter, G
    Weil, K
    Mitchell, A
    ANNALS OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2005, 46 (03) : S112 - S112
  • [36] USE OF STEVENS NASAL BALLOON IN TREATMENT OF EPISTAXIS
    BAYON, PJ
    SOUTHERN MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1965, 58 (01) : 39 - &
  • [37] The use of Merocel nasal packs in the treatment of epistaxis
    Pringle, MB
    Beasley, P
    Brightwell, AP
    JOURNAL OF LARYNGOLOGY AND OTOLOGY, 1996, 110 (06): : 543 - 546
  • [38] POSTERIOR NASAL PACKING - ARE INTRAVENOUS ANTIBIOTICS REALLY NECESSARY
    DERKAY, CS
    HIRSCH, BE
    JOHNSON, JT
    WAGNER, RL
    ARCHIVES OF OTOLARYNGOLOGY-HEAD & NECK SURGERY, 1989, 115 (04) : 439 - 441
  • [39] Should prophylactic antibiotics be used routinely in epistaxis patients with nasal packs?
    Biggs, T. C.
    Nightingale, K.
    Patel, N. N.
    Salib, R. J.
    ANNALS OF THE ROYAL COLLEGE OF SURGEONS OF ENGLAND, 2013, 95 (01) : 40 - 42
  • [40] Comparison of Local Sclerotherapy With Lauromacrogol Versus Nasal Packing in the Treatment of Anterior Epistaxis
    Farneti, Paolo
    Pasquini, Ernesto
    Sciarretta, Vittorio
    Macri, Giovanni
    Gramellini, Giulia
    Pirodda, Antonio
    CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY, 2016, 9 (02) : 131 - 135