Abstract
Current medical center practice allows for the automatic conversion of all piperacillin/tazobactam orders from intermittent to extended infusion (EI).
To compare the clinical and cost impact of empirical extended-infusion piperacillin/tazobactam.
All consecutive patients treated with piperacillin/tazobactam for >48 hours were reviewed for inclusion. Patients were stratified into 2 groups: (1) traditional infusion (TI), preprotocol implementation, and (2) EI, postprotocol implementation. Patient demographics and primary and secondary diagnoses were extracted from the hospital discharge database. All patients were assessed for the primary end point of all cause 14-day in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included length of hospital stay, duration of antibiotic therapy, cost per treatment course, and occurrence of Clostridium difficile infection.
A total of 2150 patients were included (EI = 632; TI = 1518). After adjusting for comorbidity, length of stay, and age, 14-day in-hospital mortality was similar between groups (odds ratio = 1.16; 95% CI = 0.85-1.58; P = 0.37). Length of stay was similar between the EI group versus TI (mean ± SD: 12.5 ± 9.58 days vs 11.8 ± 9.58 days, respectively; P = 0.10) after adjusting for age and Chalson-Deyo comorbidity index. Total cost per treatment course was reduced in the EI group by 13% compared with the TI group ($565.90 ± $257.70 vs $648.30 ± $349.20, respectively; P < 0.0001).
Automatic substitution of EI for TI piperacillin/tazobactam is safe and associated with significant cost savings. EI piperacillin/tazobactam was not associated with a reduction in mortality or length of stay.