Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25894986›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology2015

Evaluating antibiotic stewardship programs in patients with bacteremia using administrative data: a cohort study.

J Boel, M Søgaard, V Andreasen, J O Jarløv, M Arpi

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Observational
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

5 authors.

J BoelDepartment of Clinical Microbiology, Herlev Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Herlev Ringvej 75, 2730, Herlev, Denmark, jonas.boel@regionh.dk.
M Søgaard
V Andreasen
J O Jarløv
M Arpi

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

When introducing new antibiotic guidelines for empirical treatment of bacteremia, it is imperative to evaluate the performance of the new guideline. We examined the utility of administrative data to evaluate the effect of new antibiotic guidelines and the prognostic impact of appropriate empirical treatment. We categorized 2,008 adult patients diagnosed with bacteremia between 2010 and 2012 according to whether they received cephalosporins or fluoroquinolones (old regimen) or not (new regimen). We used administrative data to extract individual level data on mortality, readmission, and appropriateness of treatment, and computed adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for 30-day mortality and post-discharge readmission by regimen and appropriateness of treatment. In total, 945 (47.1%) were treated by the old regimen and 1,063 (52.9%) by the new. The median length of stay (8 days) did not differ by regimen and neither did the proportion of those receiving appropriate empirical treatment (84.1% vs. 85.5%). However, fewer patients with the new regimen were admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU; 3.8% vs. 12.0%) and they had lower 30-day mortality (16.4% vs. 23.4%). The adjusted 30-day mortality HR for appropriate versus inappropriate treatment was 0.79 (95% CI 0.62-1.01) and 0.83 (95% CI 0.66-1.05) for the new versus the old regimen. The HR for 30-day readmission for appropriate versus inappropriate treatment was 0.91 (95% CI 0.73-1.13) and 1.05 (95% CI 0.87-1.25) for the new versus the old regimen. This study demonstrates that administrative data can be useful for evaluating the effect and quality of new bacteremia treatment guidelines.

Indexed as

Guideline AdherenceAgedAged, 80 and overAnti-Bacterial AgentsBacteremiaCohort StudiesComorbidityDatasets as TopicFemaleHospitalizationHumansMaleMiddle AgedMortalityPractice Guidelines as TopicAnti-Bacterial Agents

Identifiers

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.