ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2016
Study on daptomycin use and implementation of an antimicrobial stewardship program.
Article in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Daptomycin use in adult inpatients in a Canadian tertiary care setting.Journal of the Association of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Disease Canada = Journal officiel de l'Association pour la microbiologie medicale et l'infectiologie Canada · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTreatment of Gram-positive pathogens remains a major health issue due to the presence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococcus spp. Daptomycin offers an alternative after therapeutic failure using glycopeptides. Yet its use requires strict control given its financial impact and environmental risks. Since 2014, the use of daptomycin within our hospital has intensified, occasionally outside the scope of its approved indications.
objectivesThe aim of this study is to analyze the appropriateness of daptomycin prescriptions.
settingThis work was conducted in a 1500-bed University Hospital.
methodA descriptive retrospective study was conducted from November 2013 to July 2014. All patients having received at least 2 days of treatment were included. Analysis of the appropriateness of daptomycin prescriptions was conducted by a multidisciplinary team comprised of infectious diseases specialists, pharmacists and a microbiologist. The appropriateness of daptomycin prescriptions was established based on Infectious Diseases Society of America recommendations published in 2011.
main outcome measuresThe indicators chosen to determine appropriateness of prescription were: treatment indication, prescribed dose and other antibiotics associated with the daptomycin prescription.
results19 patients (14 men/5 women) were included. Observed indications were: bone and joint infection (n = 6; 32 %), infectious endocarditis (n = 5; 26 %), bacteremia (n = 5; 26 %) and complicated skin and soft tissue infection (n = 3; 16 %). Identified pathogens were: MRSA (n = 14; 74 %), methicillin-resistant coagulase-negative Staphylococcus (n = 4; 21 %) and Streptococcus mitis (n = 1; 5 %). Daptomycin was prescribed as first-line treatment in 32 % of cases (n = 6). The mean dosage was 9 mg/kg/day (5-11 mg/kg/day) for a mean duration of 11 days (2; 55 days). Clinical success was observed in 42 % of cases (n = 8). Appropriateness for daptomycin use was only established for 15 % of prescriptions (n = 3).
conclusionFaced with a lack of recent recommendations on the subject, our multidisciplinary team issued a local consensus, defining the indications and dosage modalities for this reserve antibiotic. This multidisciplinary approach enables improved use of recent anti-MRSA 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.