TY - JOUR
T1 - An Australian survey of clinical practices in management of neutropenic fever in adult cancer patients 2009
AU - Lingaratnam, S
AU - Slavin, M
AU - Mileshkin, L
AU - Solomon, B
AU - Burbury, K
AU - Seymour, J
AU - Sharma, R
AU - Koczwara, Bogda
AU - Kirsa, S
AU - Davis, I
AU - Prince, M
AU - Szer, J
AU - Underhill, C
AU - Morrissey, O
AU - Thursky, K
PY - 2011/1
Y1 - 2011/1
N2 - Background: An abundance of new evidence regarding treatment strategies for neutropenic fever is likely to contribute to variability in practice across institutions and clinicians alike. Aims: To describe current clinical practices in Australia, by surveying haematologists, oncologists and infectious diseases physicians involved in cancer care. Methods: Clinician members from Australian professional associations, accounting for the vast majority of Australian cancer specialists, were invited to participate in an electronic survey, comprising of a clinical case-based questionnaire. Clinical practice areas explored were: use of risk-assessment and empiric antibiotic strategies across various treatment settings; use of anti-bacterial prophylaxis; and use of granulocyte-colony stimulating factors for established neutropenic fever and for secondary prophylaxis. Results: A total of 252 clinicians returned responses (approximately 30% response rate). The majority (>70%) were representative of practices in public, major city, tertiary referral hospitals. Less than half of clinicians were aware of risk-assessment tools and less than quarter currently used ambulatory care strategies. If adequate resources were made available, more than 80% were willing to use risk-assessment tools and 60% more clinicians were likely to use ambulatory care strategies. Most clinicians prescribed dual therapy parenteral antibiotics, even for clinically stable patients (53% haematologists, 56% oncologists). Granulocyte-colony stimulating factor was used frequently as secondary prophylaxis in the breast cancer case (91%), follicular lymphoma case (59%) and non-small cell lung cancer case (31%). Fluoroquinolone prophylaxis was infrequently prescribed (19% oncologists, 30% haematologists). Conclusions: Evidence-practice gaps were identified around the use of risk-assessment-based empiric therapy, and help to inform better clinical guidance.
AB - Background: An abundance of new evidence regarding treatment strategies for neutropenic fever is likely to contribute to variability in practice across institutions and clinicians alike. Aims: To describe current clinical practices in Australia, by surveying haematologists, oncologists and infectious diseases physicians involved in cancer care. Methods: Clinician members from Australian professional associations, accounting for the vast majority of Australian cancer specialists, were invited to participate in an electronic survey, comprising of a clinical case-based questionnaire. Clinical practice areas explored were: use of risk-assessment and empiric antibiotic strategies across various treatment settings; use of anti-bacterial prophylaxis; and use of granulocyte-colony stimulating factors for established neutropenic fever and for secondary prophylaxis. Results: A total of 252 clinicians returned responses (approximately 30% response rate). The majority (>70%) were representative of practices in public, major city, tertiary referral hospitals. Less than half of clinicians were aware of risk-assessment tools and less than quarter currently used ambulatory care strategies. If adequate resources were made available, more than 80% were willing to use risk-assessment tools and 60% more clinicians were likely to use ambulatory care strategies. Most clinicians prescribed dual therapy parenteral antibiotics, even for clinically stable patients (53% haematologists, 56% oncologists). Granulocyte-colony stimulating factor was used frequently as secondary prophylaxis in the breast cancer case (91%), follicular lymphoma case (59%) and non-small cell lung cancer case (31%). Fluoroquinolone prophylaxis was infrequently prescribed (19% oncologists, 30% haematologists). Conclusions: Evidence-practice gaps were identified around the use of risk-assessment-based empiric therapy, and help to inform better clinical guidance.
KW - Ambulatory care
KW - Antibiotics
KW - Clinical practice survey
KW - Neutropenic fever
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79251565688&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/j.1445-5994.2010.02342.x
DO - 10.1111/j.1445-5994.2010.02342.x
M3 - Article
SN - 1444-0903
VL - 41
SP - 110
EP - 120
JO - Internal Medicine Journal
JF - Internal Medicine Journal
IS - 1 B
ER -