描述医疗机构中的中性粒细胞减少性发热管理实践。调查。代表美国境内医疗机构的美国医疗保健流行病学协会研究网络 (SRN) 成员。向 SRN 代表分发了一份电子调查，其中涉及人口统计、抗菌药物等方面的问题预防、支持治疗和中性粒细胞减少性发热管理。该调查从 2022 年秋季到 2023 年春季进行。记录了完整的答复（答复率为 54.8%），受访机构约占 2021 年美国血液恶性肿瘤住院治疗的 15.7%，约占 2020 年美国骨髓移植的 ​​14.9%。大多数实体都有中性粒细胞减少性发热管理 (35, 87.5%) 和预防 (31, 77.5%) 的机构指南，一线治疗包括静脉注射抗假单胞菌抗生素（35, 87.5% 头孢菌素；5, 12.5% 青霉素；0, 0%我们观察到治疗过程决策存在显着异质性，大约一半（18，45.0%）的受访者继续使用抗生素直至中性粒细胞恢复，而其余的则在中性粒细胞恢复之前有降级标准。在经过专门的治疗课程后，对于已确定临床来源（27 名，67.5% 患有肺炎）或微生物来源（30 名，75.0% 患有菌血症）的患者，受访者更愿意在中性粒细胞恢复之前降级。 -相对于中性粒细胞恢复而言经验性抗生素的使用升级，强调需要更强有力的证据来支持和采用这种做法。没有受访者使用碳青霉烯类药物作为一线治疗，这与之前在其他国家进行的调查研究相比是有利的。

To describe neutropenic fever management practices among healthcare institutions.Survey.Members of the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America Research Network (SRN) representing healthcare institutions within the United States.An electronic survey was distributed to SRN representatives, with questions pertaining to demographics, antimicrobial prophylaxis, supportive care, and neutropenic fever management. The survey was distributed from fall 2022 through spring 2023.40 complete responses were recorded (54.8% response rate), with respondent institutions accounting for approximately 15.7% of 2021 US hematologic malignancy hospitalizations and 14.9% of 2020 US bone marrow transplantations. Most entities have institutional guidelines for neutropenic fever management (35, 87.5%) and prophylaxis (31, 77.5%), and first-line treatment included IV antipseudomonal antibiotics (35, 87.5% cephalosporin; 5, 12.5% penicillin; 0, 0% carbapenem).We observed significant heterogeneity in treatment course decisions, with roughly half (18, 45.0%) of respondents continuing antibiotics until neutrophil recovery, while the remainder having criteria for de-escalation prior to neutrophil recovery. Respondents were more willing to de-escalate prior to neutrophil recovery in patients with identified clinical (27, 67.5% with pneumonia) or microbiological (30, 75.0% with bacteremia) sources after dedicated treatment courses.We found substantial variation in the practice of de-escalation of empiric antibiotics relative to neutrophil recovery, highlighting a need for more robust evidence for and adoption of this practice. No respondents use carbapenems as first-line therapy, comparing favorably to prior survey studies conducted in other countries.