Evaluation of Sequential Oral Versus Intravenous Antibiotic Treatment of Enterococcus faecalis Bloodstream Infections

Background: Intravenous (IV) antibiotics have historically been considered standard of care for treatment of bloodstream infections (BSIs). Recent literature has shown sequential oral (PO) therapy to be noninferior to IV antibiotics for certain pathogens and disease states. However, a gap exists in...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The Annals of pharmacotherapy 2025-02, Vol.59 (2), p.127-133
Hauptverfasser: Loudermilk, Carly, Eudy, Joshua, Albrecht, Stephanie, Slaton, Cara N., Stramel, Stefanie, Tu, Patrick, Albrecht, Benjamin, Green, Sarah B., Bouchard, Jeannette L., Orvin, Alison I., Caveness, Christian F., Newsome, Andrea Sikora, Bland, Christopher M., Anderson, Daniel T.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 133
container_issue 2
container_start_page 127
container_title The Annals of pharmacotherapy
container_volume 59
creator Loudermilk, Carly
Eudy, Joshua
Albrecht, Stephanie
Slaton, Cara N.
Stramel, Stefanie
Tu, Patrick
Albrecht, Benjamin
Green, Sarah B.
Bouchard, Jeannette L.
Orvin, Alison I.
Caveness, Christian F.
Newsome, Andrea Sikora
Bland, Christopher M.
Anderson, Daniel T.
description Background: Intravenous (IV) antibiotics have historically been considered standard of care for treatment of bloodstream infections (BSIs). Recent literature has shown sequential oral (PO) therapy to be noninferior to IV antibiotics for certain pathogens and disease states. However, a gap exists in the literature for BSI caused by Enterococcus faecalis. Objective: To compare outcomes of definitive sequential PO therapy to definitive IV therapy in patients with E faecalis BSI. Methods: Multicenter, retrospective, matched cohort study of adult patients with at least one blood culture positive for E faecalis from January 2017 to November 2022. Patients with polymicrobial BSI, concomitant infections requiring prolonged IV antibiotic therapy, those who did not receive antibiotic therapy, and those who died within 72 hours of index culture were excluded. Subjects were matched based on source of infection in a 2:1 (IV:PO) ratio. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality and treatment failure. Secondary outcomes included hospital length of stay (LOS), antibiotic duration, and 30-day readmission rate. Results: Of the 186 patients who met criteria for inclusion, there was no statistically significant difference in the primary composite outcome for PO compared to IV therapy (14.5% vs 21.8%; OR 0.53 [0.23-1.25]) or 30-day readmission (17.5% vs 29%; OR 0.53 [0.25-1.13]). Hospital LOS was significantly longer in patients receiving IV-only therapy (6 days vs 14 days; P < 0.001). Conclusion and Relevance: Sequential oral therapy for E faecalis BSI had similar outcomes compared to IV-only treatment and may be considered in eligible patients.
doi_str_mv 10.1177/10600280241260146
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_3070793865</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_10600280241260146</sage_id><sourcerecordid>3070793865</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c292t-3b2f1e6213cec1b3a7fea5a2f0848db4871039e0f6a3d005b71d26b073af02103</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kDFPwzAQhS0EoqXwA1hQRpaUs53ayViqApWQGCiskeOcUaokLrZTiX-PqxYWJBb7pPveO71HyDWFKaVS3lEQACwHllEmgGbihIzpLGOpYBJO4xz36R4YkQvvNwBQUFackxHP81wCiDEZljvVDio0tk-sSV7xc8A-NKpNXlx83tH5wSerPji1w97GeR7XVWNDo5O1QxW6yO-lyz6gs9pqHSGjUKu28cl9a23tQwS76GJQ7y_5S3JmVOvx6vhPyNvDcr14Sp9fHleL-XOqWcFCyitmKApGuUZNK66kQTVTzECe5XWV5ZICLxCMULwGmFWS1kxUILkywOJuQm4PvltnYzAfyq7xGttW9RizlBwkyILnYhZRekC1s947NOXWNZ1yXyWFct92-aftqLk52g9Vh_Wv4qfeCEwPgFcfWG7s4PoY9x_Hb3uBiMs</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3070793865</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Evaluation of Sequential Oral Versus Intravenous Antibiotic Treatment of Enterococcus faecalis Bloodstream Infections</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SAGE Complete</source><creator>Loudermilk, Carly ; Eudy, Joshua ; Albrecht, Stephanie ; Slaton, Cara N. ; Stramel, Stefanie ; Tu, Patrick ; Albrecht, Benjamin ; Green, Sarah B. ; Bouchard, Jeannette L. ; Orvin, Alison I. ; Caveness, Christian F. ; Newsome, Andrea Sikora ; Bland, Christopher M. ; Anderson, Daniel T.</creator><creatorcontrib>Loudermilk, Carly ; Eudy, Joshua ; Albrecht, Stephanie ; Slaton, Cara N. ; Stramel, Stefanie ; Tu, Patrick ; Albrecht, Benjamin ; Green, Sarah B. ; Bouchard, Jeannette L. ; Orvin, Alison I. ; Caveness, Christian F. ; Newsome, Andrea Sikora ; Bland, Christopher M. ; Anderson, Daniel T.</creatorcontrib><description>Background: Intravenous (IV) antibiotics have historically been considered standard of care for treatment of bloodstream infections (BSIs). Recent literature has shown sequential oral (PO) therapy to be noninferior to IV antibiotics for certain pathogens and disease states. However, a gap exists in the literature for BSI caused by Enterococcus faecalis. Objective: To compare outcomes of definitive sequential PO therapy to definitive IV therapy in patients with E faecalis BSI. Methods: Multicenter, retrospective, matched cohort study of adult patients with at least one blood culture positive for E faecalis from January 2017 to November 2022. Patients with polymicrobial BSI, concomitant infections requiring prolonged IV antibiotic therapy, those who did not receive antibiotic therapy, and those who died within 72 hours of index culture were excluded. Subjects were matched based on source of infection in a 2:1 (IV:PO) ratio. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality and treatment failure. Secondary outcomes included hospital length of stay (LOS), antibiotic duration, and 30-day readmission rate. Results: Of the 186 patients who met criteria for inclusion, there was no statistically significant difference in the primary composite outcome for PO compared to IV therapy (14.5% vs 21.8%; OR 0.53 [0.23-1.25]) or 30-day readmission (17.5% vs 29%; OR 0.53 [0.25-1.13]). Hospital LOS was significantly longer in patients receiving IV-only therapy (6 days vs 14 days; P &lt; 0.001). Conclusion and Relevance: Sequential oral therapy for E faecalis BSI had similar outcomes compared to IV-only treatment and may be considered in eligible patients.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1060-0280</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1542-6270</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1542-6270</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/10600280241260146</identifier><identifier>PMID: 38887006</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Administration, Intravenous ; Administration, Oral ; Adult ; Aged ; Anti-Bacterial Agents - administration &amp; dosage ; Anti-Bacterial Agents - therapeutic use ; Bacteremia - drug therapy ; Bacteremia - microbiology ; Bacteremia - mortality ; Cohort Studies ; Enterococcus faecalis - drug effects ; Female ; Gram-Positive Bacterial Infections - drug therapy ; Humans ; Length of Stay ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Patient Readmission - statistics &amp; numerical data ; Retrospective Studies ; Treatment Outcome</subject><ispartof>The Annals of pharmacotherapy, 2025-02, Vol.59 (2), p.127-133</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2024</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c292t-3b2f1e6213cec1b3a7fea5a2f0848db4871039e0f6a3d005b71d26b073af02103</cites><orcidid>0009-0003-5661-8619 ; 0000-0001-8806-4583 ; 0000-0002-5502-1533 ; 0009-0006-9579-5775 ; 0000-0002-5983-2835 ; 0000-0003-4782-1538 ; 0000-0003-2020-0571 ; 0000-0003-0653-7477</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/10600280241260146$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/10600280241260146$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,21798,27901,27902,43597,43598</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38887006$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Loudermilk, Carly</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Eudy, Joshua</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Albrecht, Stephanie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Slaton, Cara N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stramel, Stefanie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tu, Patrick</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Albrecht, Benjamin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Green, Sarah B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bouchard, Jeannette L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Orvin, Alison I.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Caveness, Christian F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Newsome, Andrea Sikora</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bland, Christopher M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Anderson, Daniel T.</creatorcontrib><title>Evaluation of Sequential Oral Versus Intravenous Antibiotic Treatment of Enterococcus faecalis Bloodstream Infections</title><title>The Annals of pharmacotherapy</title><addtitle>Ann Pharmacother</addtitle><description>Background: Intravenous (IV) antibiotics have historically been considered standard of care for treatment of bloodstream infections (BSIs). Recent literature has shown sequential oral (PO) therapy to be noninferior to IV antibiotics for certain pathogens and disease states. However, a gap exists in the literature for BSI caused by Enterococcus faecalis. Objective: To compare outcomes of definitive sequential PO therapy to definitive IV therapy in patients with E faecalis BSI. Methods: Multicenter, retrospective, matched cohort study of adult patients with at least one blood culture positive for E faecalis from January 2017 to November 2022. Patients with polymicrobial BSI, concomitant infections requiring prolonged IV antibiotic therapy, those who did not receive antibiotic therapy, and those who died within 72 hours of index culture were excluded. Subjects were matched based on source of infection in a 2:1 (IV:PO) ratio. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality and treatment failure. Secondary outcomes included hospital length of stay (LOS), antibiotic duration, and 30-day readmission rate. Results: Of the 186 patients who met criteria for inclusion, there was no statistically significant difference in the primary composite outcome for PO compared to IV therapy (14.5% vs 21.8%; OR 0.53 [0.23-1.25]) or 30-day readmission (17.5% vs 29%; OR 0.53 [0.25-1.13]). Hospital LOS was significantly longer in patients receiving IV-only therapy (6 days vs 14 days; P &lt; 0.001). Conclusion and Relevance: Sequential oral therapy for E faecalis BSI had similar outcomes compared to IV-only treatment and may be considered in eligible patients.</description><subject>Administration, Intravenous</subject><subject>Administration, Oral</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Anti-Bacterial Agents - administration &amp; dosage</subject><subject>Anti-Bacterial Agents - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Bacteremia - drug therapy</subject><subject>Bacteremia - microbiology</subject><subject>Bacteremia - mortality</subject><subject>Cohort Studies</subject><subject>Enterococcus faecalis - drug effects</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Gram-Positive Bacterial Infections - drug therapy</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Length of Stay</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Patient Readmission - statistics &amp; numerical data</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><issn>1060-0280</issn><issn>1542-6270</issn><issn>1542-6270</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2025</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kDFPwzAQhS0EoqXwA1hQRpaUs53ayViqApWQGCiskeOcUaokLrZTiX-PqxYWJBb7pPveO71HyDWFKaVS3lEQACwHllEmgGbihIzpLGOpYBJO4xz36R4YkQvvNwBQUFackxHP81wCiDEZljvVDio0tk-sSV7xc8A-NKpNXlx83tH5wSerPji1w97GeR7XVWNDo5O1QxW6yO-lyz6gs9pqHSGjUKu28cl9a23tQwS76GJQ7y_5S3JmVOvx6vhPyNvDcr14Sp9fHleL-XOqWcFCyitmKApGuUZNK66kQTVTzECe5XWV5ZICLxCMULwGmFWS1kxUILkywOJuQm4PvltnYzAfyq7xGttW9RizlBwkyILnYhZRekC1s947NOXWNZ1yXyWFct92-aftqLk52g9Vh_Wv4qfeCEwPgFcfWG7s4PoY9x_Hb3uBiMs</recordid><startdate>202502</startdate><enddate>202502</enddate><creator>Loudermilk, Carly</creator><creator>Eudy, Joshua</creator><creator>Albrecht, Stephanie</creator><creator>Slaton, Cara N.</creator><creator>Stramel, Stefanie</creator><creator>Tu, Patrick</creator><creator>Albrecht, Benjamin</creator><creator>Green, Sarah B.</creator><creator>Bouchard, Jeannette L.</creator><creator>Orvin, Alison I.</creator><creator>Caveness, Christian F.</creator><creator>Newsome, Andrea Sikora</creator><creator>Bland, Christopher M.</creator><creator>Anderson, Daniel T.</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0009-0003-5661-8619</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8806-4583</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5502-1533</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0009-0006-9579-5775</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5983-2835</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4782-1538</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2020-0571</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0653-7477</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202502</creationdate><title>Evaluation of Sequential Oral Versus Intravenous Antibiotic Treatment of Enterococcus faecalis Bloodstream Infections</title><author>Loudermilk, Carly ; Eudy, Joshua ; Albrecht, Stephanie ; Slaton, Cara N. ; Stramel, Stefanie ; Tu, Patrick ; Albrecht, Benjamin ; Green, Sarah B. ; Bouchard, Jeannette L. ; Orvin, Alison I. ; Caveness, Christian F. ; Newsome, Andrea Sikora ; Bland, Christopher M. ; Anderson, Daniel T.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c292t-3b2f1e6213cec1b3a7fea5a2f0848db4871039e0f6a3d005b71d26b073af02103</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2025</creationdate><topic>Administration, Intravenous</topic><topic>Administration, Oral</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Anti-Bacterial Agents - administration &amp; dosage</topic><topic>Anti-Bacterial Agents - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Bacteremia - drug therapy</topic><topic>Bacteremia - microbiology</topic><topic>Bacteremia - mortality</topic><topic>Cohort Studies</topic><topic>Enterococcus faecalis - drug effects</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Gram-Positive Bacterial Infections - drug therapy</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Length of Stay</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Patient Readmission - statistics &amp; numerical data</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Loudermilk, Carly</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Eudy, Joshua</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Albrecht, Stephanie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Slaton, Cara N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stramel, Stefanie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tu, Patrick</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Albrecht, Benjamin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Green, Sarah B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bouchard, Jeannette L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Orvin, Alison I.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Caveness, Christian F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Newsome, Andrea Sikora</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bland, Christopher M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Anderson, Daniel T.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>The Annals of pharmacotherapy</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Loudermilk, Carly</au><au>Eudy, Joshua</au><au>Albrecht, Stephanie</au><au>Slaton, Cara N.</au><au>Stramel, Stefanie</au><au>Tu, Patrick</au><au>Albrecht, Benjamin</au><au>Green, Sarah B.</au><au>Bouchard, Jeannette L.</au><au>Orvin, Alison I.</au><au>Caveness, Christian F.</au><au>Newsome, Andrea Sikora</au><au>Bland, Christopher M.</au><au>Anderson, Daniel T.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Evaluation of Sequential Oral Versus Intravenous Antibiotic Treatment of Enterococcus faecalis Bloodstream Infections</atitle><jtitle>The Annals of pharmacotherapy</jtitle><addtitle>Ann Pharmacother</addtitle><date>2025-02</date><risdate>2025</risdate><volume>59</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>127</spage><epage>133</epage><pages>127-133</pages><issn>1060-0280</issn><issn>1542-6270</issn><eissn>1542-6270</eissn><abstract>Background: Intravenous (IV) antibiotics have historically been considered standard of care for treatment of bloodstream infections (BSIs). Recent literature has shown sequential oral (PO) therapy to be noninferior to IV antibiotics for certain pathogens and disease states. However, a gap exists in the literature for BSI caused by Enterococcus faecalis. Objective: To compare outcomes of definitive sequential PO therapy to definitive IV therapy in patients with E faecalis BSI. Methods: Multicenter, retrospective, matched cohort study of adult patients with at least one blood culture positive for E faecalis from January 2017 to November 2022. Patients with polymicrobial BSI, concomitant infections requiring prolonged IV antibiotic therapy, those who did not receive antibiotic therapy, and those who died within 72 hours of index culture were excluded. Subjects were matched based on source of infection in a 2:1 (IV:PO) ratio. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality and treatment failure. Secondary outcomes included hospital length of stay (LOS), antibiotic duration, and 30-day readmission rate. Results: Of the 186 patients who met criteria for inclusion, there was no statistically significant difference in the primary composite outcome for PO compared to IV therapy (14.5% vs 21.8%; OR 0.53 [0.23-1.25]) or 30-day readmission (17.5% vs 29%; OR 0.53 [0.25-1.13]). Hospital LOS was significantly longer in patients receiving IV-only therapy (6 days vs 14 days; P &lt; 0.001). Conclusion and Relevance: Sequential oral therapy for E faecalis BSI had similar outcomes compared to IV-only treatment and may be considered in eligible patients.</abstract><cop>Los Angeles, CA</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><pmid>38887006</pmid><doi>10.1177/10600280241260146</doi><tpages>7</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0009-0003-5661-8619</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8806-4583</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5502-1533</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0009-0006-9579-5775</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5983-2835</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4782-1538</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2020-0571</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0653-7477</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1060-0280
ispartof The Annals of pharmacotherapy, 2025-02, Vol.59 (2), p.127-133
issn 1060-0280
1542-6270
1542-6270
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_3070793865
source MEDLINE; SAGE Complete
subjects Administration, Intravenous
Administration, Oral
Adult
Aged
Anti-Bacterial Agents - administration & dosage
Anti-Bacterial Agents - therapeutic use
Bacteremia - drug therapy
Bacteremia - microbiology
Bacteremia - mortality
Cohort Studies
Enterococcus faecalis - drug effects
Female
Gram-Positive Bacterial Infections - drug therapy
Humans
Length of Stay
Male
Middle Aged
Patient Readmission - statistics & numerical data
Retrospective Studies
Treatment Outcome
title Evaluation of Sequential Oral Versus Intravenous Antibiotic Treatment of Enterococcus faecalis Bloodstream Infections
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-04T22%3A13%3A09IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Evaluation%20of%20Sequential%20Oral%20Versus%20Intravenous%20Antibiotic%20Treatment%20of%20Enterococcus%20faecalis%20Bloodstream%20Infections&rft.jtitle=The%20Annals%20of%20pharmacotherapy&rft.au=Loudermilk,%20Carly&rft.date=2025-02&rft.volume=59&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=127&rft.epage=133&rft.pages=127-133&rft.issn=1060-0280&rft.eissn=1542-6270&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/10600280241260146&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3070793865%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3070793865&rft_id=info:pmid/38887006&rft_sage_id=10.1177_10600280241260146&rfr_iscdi=true