IntroductionThe aims of this study were to explore the incidence of in-hospital inappropriate empiric antibiotic use in patients with severe infection and to identify its relationship with patient outcomes.MethodsMedline (from 2004 to 2014) was systematically searched by using predefined inclusion criteria. Reference lists of retrieved articles were screened for additional relevant studies. The systematic review included original articles reporting a quantitative measure of the association between the use of (in)appropriate empiric antibiotics in patients with severe in-hospital infections and their outcomes. A meta-analysis, using a random-effects model, was conducted to quantify the effect on mortality by using risk ratios.ResultsIn total, 27 individual articles fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The percentage of inappropriate empiric antibiotic use ranged from 14.1% to 78.9% (Q1-Q3: 28.1% to 57.8%); 13 of 27 studies (48.1%) described an incidence of 50% or more. A meta-analysis for 30-day mortality and in-hospital mortality showed risk ratios of 0.71 (95% confidence interval 0.62 to 0.82) and 0.67 (95% confidence interval 0.56 to 0.80), respectively. Studies with outcome parameter 28-day and 60-day mortality reported significantly (P ≤0.02) higher mortality rates in patients receiving inappropriate antibiotics. Two studies assessed the total costs, which were significantly higher in both studies (P ≤0.01).ConclusionsThis systematic review with meta-analysis provides evidence that inappropriate use of empiric antibiotics increases 30-day and in-hospital mortality in patients with a severe infection.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13054-015-0795-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Adults with congenital heart disease perceived their quality of life to be better than did their healthy counterparts. This finding refutes the presumed lower quality of life in patients with cardiac anomalies.

Aims During the last decade, a paradigm shift has emerged in the measurement of quality of life, from the use of standard questionnaires towards a more individualized approach. Therefore, this study examined individual quality of life in adults with congenital heart disease and explored potential differences with those reported by matched, healthy control subjects. Methods and resultsWe examined 579 adults with congenital heart disease. A subsample of 514 of these patients was matched for age, gender, educational level, and employment status with 446 healthy counterparts. Individual quality of life was assessed using the Schedule for the Evaluation of Individual Quality of Life-Direct Weighting (SEIQoL-DW). Twelve domains affecting patients' quality of life were identified. Family, job/education, friends, health, and leisure time were the most prominent quality of life domains. Significantly fewer patients than control subjects considered financial means and material well-being and future to be important determinants of quality of life. Conclusion Assessment of quality of life in adults with congenital heart disease that focusses on the individual is appropriate for obtaining in-depth information on issues relevant for patients' quality of life. This represents a paradigm shift in the measurement of this concept.

Background: Multi-morbidity and polypharmacy of the elderly population enhances the probability of elderly in residential long-term care facilities experiencing inappropriate medication use.Objectives: The aim is to systematically review literature to assess the prevalence of inappropriate medication use in residential long-term care facilities for the elderly.Methods: Databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE) were searched for literature from 2004 to 2016 to identify studies examining inappropriate medication use in residential long-term care facilities for the elderly. Studies were eligible when relying on Beers criteria, STOPP, START, PRISCUS list, ACOVE, BEDNURS or MAI instruments. Inappropriate medication use was defined by the criteria of these seven instruments.Results: Twenty-one studies met inclusion criteria. Seventeen studies relied on a version of Beers criteria with prevalence ranging between 18.5% and 82.6% (median 46.5%) residents experiencing inappropriate medication use. A smaller range, from 21.3% to 63.0% (median 35.1%), was reported when considering solely the 10 studies that used Beers criteria updated in 2003. Prevalence varied from 23.7% to 79.8% (median 61.1%) in seven studies relying on STOPP. START and ACOVE were relied on in respectively four (prevalence: 30.5–74.0%) and two studies (prevalence: 28.9–58.0%); PRISCUS, BEDNURS and MAI were all used in one study each.Conclusions: Beers criteria of 2003 and STOPP were most frequently used to determine inappropriate medication use in residential long-term care facilities. Prevalence of inappropriate medication use strongly varied, despite similarities in research design and assessment with identical instrument(s).