ArticleJournal of clinical and diagnostic research : JCDR2015
Reserve drug indent form and its impact on antimicrobial consumption and sensitivity pattern in the medical intensive care unit of a tertiary care hospital.
Article in Journal of clinical and diagnostic research : JCDR, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Value of hospital antimicrobial stewardship programs [ASPs]: a systematic review.Antimicrobial resistance and infection control · 2019Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesA world without effective antibiotics is a terrifying but a real prospect. Overuse or misuse especially of newer and higher antimicrobials (AM) is of particular concern, as this contributes to development of resistance among microorganisms. To check this trend, the Reserve Drug Indent Form (RDIF) was introduced in our hospital and its impact on AM consumption, cost of therapy and the sensitivity pattern was studied in the medical intensive care unit (MICU). MATERIALS AND
methodsA retrospective descriptive study in the medical ICU of a tertiary care hospital from July 2012 to August 2013. From March 2013, RDIF was made mandatory to be filled up prior to prescribing reserve antimicrobials. AM consumption (expressed as DDD/100 bed days) and sensitivity pattern (expressed in percentage) six months prior to and six months after implementation of the form were analysed.
resultsThe total Reserve AM consumption was 125.79 per 100 bed days during the study period. Average occupancy index was 0.50 and length of ICU stay was 6 days. The total consumption reduced from 85.55/100 to 40.24/100 bed days after the introduction of the RDIF. However, Imipenem usage increased from 11.35/100 to 23.94/100 bed days, which can be attributed to sensitivity profile to Imipenem (82.1%) compared to Meropenem (65.7%). Cost of therapy reduced from Rs 6,27,951 to 4,20,469.
conclusionReserve AM consumption showed a declining trend after introduction of the RDIF. Hence, the RDIF served as an important tool to combat inappropriate use, reducing the cost burden and also helped to improve the sensitivity to reserve drugs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.