Evidence map›Paper›PMID 10724791›Full record

ReviewPharmacoEconomics1999

Diagnosis and management of osteomyelitis. Decision analytic and pharmacoeconomic considerations.

M Tavakoli, P Davey, B A Clift, H T Davies

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in PharmacoEconomics, 1999. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 30% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 258 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

M TavakoliDepartment of Management, University of St Andrews, Fife, Scotland. mt@st-and.ac.uk
P Davey
B A Clift
H T Davies
University of St Andrews · GBNinewells Hospital · GBPerth Royal Infirmary · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Osteomyelitis, or bone infection, is becoming more common, largely because of increases in the use of implanted prosthetic devices in the management of arthritis or fractures. The clinical management of osteomyelitis requires accurate microbiological diagnosis that will identify appropriate antibacterials to which the pathogenic organisms are sensitive. Therapy will largely depend on the type of bacteria, the route by which the bacteria reach the bone, the presence of any orthopaedic devices and the patient's ability to mount an immune response. Consequently, therapy often requires a combination of medical and surgical management. The aim of this review is primarily to assess the impact of different drug regimens on the total cost and to clarify the implications of various treatment options for patients with osteomyelitis. Thus, the review examines the link between the main categories of osteomyelitis and common pathogens, and provides additional comments on the aetiology and epidemiology of the condition. At present, there is a real shortage of high quality evidence to guide the decision-maker through the range of available options. One way to deal with the complexity and uncertainty surrounding the management of osteomyelitis is to develop treatment protocols leading to decision trees which will in turn systematically analyse the options available for treating patients with osteomyelitis. Consequently, we have developed a number of decision trees to show the range of options available and have applied these to the relatively simple problem of route of administration of antibacterials. However, even here the available data allow only relatively crude estimations of the costs and consequences of alternative regimens. Thus, the aim has been to provide structures that may help to set priorities for research based on the expected value of new information. In the absence of evidence, there are broadly 2 alternatives. One is based on selection of the least expensive regimen in the absence of evidence to prove that more expensive options are more effective; patients with multiply resistant staphylococci, for which no effective oral regimen is available, should be treated with intravenous therapy. This is consistent with the UK legal system, which is founded on the so-called Bolam test. The alternative is providing the maximum available treatment; in the US, it is more likely that a doctor will be held negligent for not providing the maximum available treatment, and most standard texts recommend routine use of intravenous therapy for osteomyelitis.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsDecision MakingHumansOsteomyelitisAnti-Bacterial Agents

Identifiers

PMID10724791
OpenAlexW2041606985

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.