Pseudomonas Aeruginosa also known as P. aeruginosa is a potential and commonly lethal cause of gram-negative infections (McCarthy, 2015). Infections resulting from P. aeruginosa are related with high rate of mortality and morbidity (Mizuta et al., 2006). Regrettably, the rise in P. aeruginosa resistance increasingly complicates decisions concerning treatment and leads to possible delays in suitable empirical dual antimicrobial therapy (Mizuta et al., 2006). However, early empirical dual antimicrobial therapy is one possible option that can be used that can lead to one selected agent that can be active against a pathogen that is causing infection (Tamma, Cosgrove & Maragakis, 2012). Dual antimicrobial therapy is normally utilized when infection
…show more content…
aeruginosa is normally susceptible. Nevertheless, it is not clear if this is the optimal way to select two antimicrobials for combined or dual therapy. For instance, in the case isolates resistant to one drug are also resistant to another drug, combining these two drugs certainly does not attain coverage increase. However, to come up with a suitable combination of antimicrobial agents for P. aeruginosa empirical therapy infection, an evaluation needs to be done. This will ensure that the optimum antibiogram to consult for dual therapy will have adequate information with respect to which dual therapy accomplishes the greatest P. aeruginosa coverage.
Objectives
The objective of this study is to identify an antimicrobial regime that optimizes the chance of achieving an effective regimen against P. aeruginosa isolates of blood through the development of a dual antibiogram (Christoff et al., 2010). Other objectives examine the identification of risk factors for drugs that are multi-resistant P. aeruginosa, and find out the effect on mortality when attaining one, or two active agents in all neutropenic patients. …show more content…
aeruginosa, limitation exist that may undermine the development of a suitable combination antibiogram for P. aeruginosa infections. Although targeting was done on a variety of pathogens that are gram negative when choosing empirical therapy, analysis is only limited to isolates of P. aeruginosa (Mizuta et al., 2006). Antibiograms in the study were created based on the results of positive respiratory cultures (Pogue et al, 2011). This method only identified the organisms that were seen to require coverage in an empirical regime. Data on possible patient specific state, such as severity of illness, comorbidities, and prior antibiotics were not included. Hence, it becomes impossible to measure the potential impact of exposure of healthcare in this analysis. These limitations highlight the issue that analysis should not only be limited to isolated P. aeruginosa infections, in addition to creating antibiograms that are based on both positive and negative respiratory cultures. Also, data needs to be readily available to allow clinicians to measure the potential impact of exposure of healthcare in this
aeruginosa is normally susceptible. Nevertheless, it is not clear if this is the optimal way to select two antimicrobials for combined or dual therapy. For instance, in the case isolates resistant to one drug are also resistant to another drug, combining these two drugs certainly does not attain coverage increase. However, to come up with a suitable combination of antimicrobial agents for P. aeruginosa empirical therapy infection, an evaluation needs to be done. This will ensure that the optimum antibiogram to consult for dual therapy will have adequate information with respect to which dual therapy accomplishes the greatest P. aeruginosa coverage.
Objectives
The objective of this study is to identify an antimicrobial regime that optimizes the chance of achieving an effective regimen against P. aeruginosa isolates of blood through the development of a dual antibiogram (Christoff et al., 2010). Other objectives examine the identification of risk factors for drugs that are multi-resistant P. aeruginosa, and find out the effect on mortality when attaining one, or two active agents in all neutropenic patients. …show more content…
aeruginosa, limitation exist that may undermine the development of a suitable combination antibiogram for P. aeruginosa infections. Although targeting was done on a variety of pathogens that are gram negative when choosing empirical therapy, analysis is only limited to isolates of P. aeruginosa (Mizuta et al., 2006). Antibiograms in the study were created based on the results of positive respiratory cultures (Pogue et al, 2011). This method only identified the organisms that were seen to require coverage in an empirical regime. Data on possible patient specific state, such as severity of illness, comorbidities, and prior antibiotics were not included. Hence, it becomes impossible to measure the potential impact of exposure of healthcare in this analysis. These limitations highlight the issue that analysis should not only be limited to isolated P. aeruginosa infections, in addition to creating antibiograms that are based on both positive and negative respiratory cultures. Also, data needs to be readily available to allow clinicians to measure the potential impact of exposure of healthcare in this