Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18705821›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of clinical practice2008

Outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy with daptomycin: insights from a patient registry.

W J Martone, K C Lindfield, D E Katz

Open access · greenAbstract readComparative StudyEvaluation StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of clinical practice, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.8field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 53 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Economic evaluation of treatment for MRSA complicated skin and soft tissue infections in Glasgow hospitals.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2014
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy for surgery patients: A comparison with previous standard of care.The Canadian journal of infectious diseases & medical microbiology = Journal canadien des maladies infectieuses et de la microbiologie medicale · 2013
    Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

W J MartoneCubist Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Lexington, MA 02421, USA. william.martone@cubist.com
K C Lindfield
D E Katz
Cubist Pharmaceuticals (United States) · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo compare and contrast the characteristics and clinical outcomes of patients who have received daptomycin as outpatients and inpatients.

methodsThe Cubicin Outcomes Registry and Experience (CORE) is a retrospective chart review of patients who have received daptomycin in participating institutions. Patients treated in 2005 were included in this analysis. Demographic characteristics and clinical outcomes (success = cured + improved) were compared among patients who received outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy (OPAT) and patients who had received inpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy (IPAT).

resultsOf 1172 patients reported by 52 CORE 2005 participating institutions/investigators, 949 (81.0%) patients were evaluable: 539 (56.8%) received OPAT (OPAT patients), and 410 (43.2%) received only IPAT (IPAT patients). Of the 539 OPAT patients, 273 (50.6%) also received some IPAT, usually preceding OPAT therapy. Successful outcomes [no. of successes/(no. of successes + no. of failures)] for OPAT patients vs. IPAT patients were 94.6% and 86.3% respectively (chi-square test, p < 0.001). OPAT patients were younger, had fewer underlying diseases, were clinically stable, and had fewer adverse events than IPAT patients.

conclusionsOutpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy use was common (539/949 or 56.8%) among patients in CORE 2005. Clinical outcomes among OPAT patients appeared at least as good as or better than IPAT patients. Better outcomes among OPAT patients were most likely because of patient selection for OPAT. Additional studies should focus on clinical characteristics of patients who would be ideal candidates for daptomycin OPAT.

Indexed as

Home Infusion TherapyAgedAmbulatory CareAnti-Bacterial AgentsBacterial InfectionsDaptomycinEpidemiologic MethodsFemaleHospitalizationHumansInfusions, ParenteralMaleMiddle AgedPatient SatisfactionTreatment OutcomeAnti-Bacterial AgentsDaptomycin

Identifiers

PMID18705821
PMCPMC2658009
OpenAlexW1746733017

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.