Highlights d Senescent cancer cells respond differently to senolytic ABT-263 d SASP expression in cancer is heterogeneous and influenced by cell origin d The SENCAN classifier detects cancer cell senescence in vitro d The Cancer SENESCopedia contains transcriptome data from 37 senescence models
Background
In daily hospital practice, antibiotic therapy is commonly prescribed for longer than recommended in guidelines. Understanding the key drivers of prescribing behaviour is crucial to generate meaningful interventions to bridge this evidence-to-practice gap.
Objectives
To identify behavioural determinants that might prevent or enable improvements in duration of antibiotic therapy in daily practice.
Methods
We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO and Web of Science for relevant studies that were published between January 2000 and August 2021. All qualitative, quantitative and mixed-method studies in adults in a hospital setting that reported determinants of antibiotic therapy duration were included.
Results
Twenty-two papers were included in this review. A first set of studies provided 82 behavioural determinants that shape how health professionals make decisions about duration; most of these were related to individual health professionals’ knowledge, skills and cognitions, and to professionals’ interactions. A second set of studies provided 17 determinants that point to differences in duration regarding various pathogens, diseases, or patient, professional or hospital department characteristics, but do not explain why or how these differences occur.
Conclusions
Limited literature is available describing a wide range of determinants that influence duration of antibiotic therapy in daily practice. This review provides a stepping stone for the development of stewardship interventions to optimize antibiotic therapy duration, but more research is warranted. Stewardship teams must develop complex improvement interventions to address the wide variety of behavioural determinants, adapted to the specific pathogen, disease, patient, professional and/or hospital department involved.
Infectious complications occur frequently after esophagectomy. Selective decontamination of the digestive tract (SDD) has been shown to reduce postoperative infections and anastomotic leakage in gastrointestinal surgery, but robust evidence for esophageal surgery is lacking. The aim was to evaluate the association between SDD and pneumonia, surgical-site infections (SSIs), anastomotic leakage, and 1-year mortality after esophagectomy. A retrospective cohort study was conducted in patients undergoing Ivor Lewis esophagectomy in four Dutch hospitals between 2012 and 2018. Two hospitals used SDD perioperatively and two did not. SDD consisted of an oral paste and suspension (containing amphotericin B, colistin, and tobramycin). The primary outcomes were 30-day postoperative pneumonia and SSIs. Secondary outcomes were anastomotic leakage and 1-year mortality. Logistic regression analyses were performed to determine the association between SDD and the relevant outcomes (odds ratio (OR)). A total of 496 patients were included, of whom 179 received SDD perioperatively and the other 317 patients did not receive SDD. Patients who received SDD were less likely to develop postoperative pneumonia (20.1% vs. 36.9%, p < 0.001) and anastomotic leakage (10.6% vs. 19.9%, p = 0.008). Multivariate analysis showed that SDD is an independent protective factor for postoperative pneumonia (OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.23–0.67, p < 0.001) and anastomotic leakage (OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.26–0.84, p = 0.011). Use of perioperative SDD seems to be associated with a lower risk of pneumonia and anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.