Acne vulgaris is considered one of the most common medical skin conditions globally, affecting approximately 85% of individuals worldwide. While acne is most prevalent among adolescents between 15 to 24 years old, it is not uncommon in adults either. Acne addresses a number of different challenges, causing a multidimensional disease burden. These challenges include clinical sequelae, such as post inflammatory hyperpigmentation (PIH) and the chance of developing lifelong disfiguring scars, psychological aspects such as deficits in health related quality of life, chronicity of acne, economic factors, and treatment-related issues, such as antimicrobial resistance. The multidimensionality of the disease burden stipulates the importance of an effective and timely treatment in a well organised care system. Within the Netherlands, acne care provision is managed by several types of professional care givers, each approaching acne care from different angles: (I) general practitioners (GPs) who serve as ‘gatekeepers’ of healthcare within primary care; (II) dermatologists providing specialist medical care within secondary care; (III) dermal therapists, a non-physician medical professional with a bachelor’s degree, exclusively operating within the Australian and Dutch primary and secondary health care; and (IV) beauticians, mainly working within the cosmetology or wellness domain. However, despite the large variety in acne care services, many patients experience a delay between the onset of acne and receiving an effective treatment, or a prolonged use of care, which raises the question whether acne related care resources are being used in the most effective and (cost)efficient way. It is therefore necessary to gain insights into the organization and quality of Dutch acne health care beyond conventional guidelines and protocols. Exploring areas of care that may need improvement allow Dutch acne healthcare services to develop and improve the quality of acne care services in harmony with patient needs.
BACKGROUND: Urinary and (peripheral and central) intravenous catheters are widely used in hospitalized patients. However, up to 56% of the catheters do not have an appropriate indication and some serious complications with the use of these catheters can occur. The main objective of our quality improvement project is to reduce the use of catheters without an appropriate indication by 25-50%, and to evaluate the affecting factors of our de-implementation strategy.METHODS: In a multicenter, prospective interrupted time series analysis, several interventions to avoid inappropriate use of catheters will be conducted in seven hospitals in the Netherlands. Firstly, we will define a list of appropriate indications for urinary and (peripheral and central) intravenous catheters, which will restrict the use of catheters and urge catheter removal when the indication is no longer appropriate. Secondly, after the baseline measurements, the intervention will take place, which consists of a kick-off meeting, including a competitive feedback report of the baseline measurements, and education of healthcare workers and patients. Additional strategies based on the baseline data and local conditions are optional. The primary endpoint is the percentage of catheters with an inappropriate indication on the day of data collection before and after the de-implementation strategy. Secondary endpoints are catheter-related infections or other complications, catheter re-insertion rate, length of hospital (and ICU) stay and mortality. In addition, the cost-effectiveness of the de-implementation strategy will be calculated.DISCUSSION: This study aims to reduce the use of urinary and intravenous catheters with an inappropriate indication, and as a result reduce the catheter-related complications. If (cost-) effective it provides a tool for a nationwide approach to reduce catheter-related infections and other complications.TRIAL REGISTRATION: Dutch trial registry: NTR6015 . Registered 9 August 2016.
Matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionisation time of-flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS) is a fast and reliable method for the identification of bacteria from agar media. Direct identification from positive blood cultures should decrease the time to obtaining the result. In this study, three different processing methods for the rapid direct identification of bacteria from positive blood culture bottles were compared. In total, 101 positive aerobe BacT/ALERT bottles were included in this study. Aliquots from all bottles were used for three bacterial processing methods, i.e. the commercially available Bruker's MALDI Sepsityper kit, the commercially available Molzym's MolYsis Basic5 kit and a centrifugation/washing method. In addition, the best method was used to evaluate the possibility of MALDI application after a reduced incubation time of 7 h of Staphylococcus aureus- and Escherichia coli-spiked (1,000, 100 and 10 colony-forming units [CFU]) aerobe BacT/ALERT blood cultures. Sixty-six (65%), 51 (50.5%) and 79 (78%) bottles were identified correctly at the species level when the centrifugation/washing method, MolYsis Basic 5 and Sepsityper were used, respectively. Incorrect identification was obtained in 35 (35%), 50 (49.5%) and 22 (22%) bottles, respectively. Gram-positive cocci were correctly identified in 33/52 (64%) of the cases. However, Gram-negative rods showed a correct identification in 45/47 (96%) of all bottles when the Sepsityper kit was used. Seven hours of pre-incubation of S. aureus- and E. coli-spiked aerobe BacT/ALERT blood cultures never resulted in reliable identification with MALDI-TOF MS. Sepsityper is superior for the direct identification of microorganisms from aerobe BacT/ALERT bottles. Gram-negative pathogens show better results compared to Gram-positive bacteria. Reduced incubation followed by MALDI-TOF MS did not result in faster reliable identification.
