ArticleBMC infectious diseases2018
Evaluation of Candida bloodstream infection and antifungal utilization in a tertiary care hospital.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systematic Review of Candidemia in Brazil: Unlocking Historical Trends and Challenges in Conducting Surveys in Middle-Income Countries.Mycopathologia · 2024Pooled it
- Shift in Candidemia Epidemiology and Emerging Fluconazole Resistance inJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Antifungal Resistance Among Candida Species: Diagnostic and Clinical Challenges in Specialized Cancer Care Hospital of Lahore.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2025Article
- Clinical pharmacist-led antifungal drug utilization reviews in cancer care hospital: a prospective audit and feedback.JAC-antimicrobial resistance · 2024Article
- Secular trends of candidemia at a Brazilian tertiary care teaching hospital.The Brazilian journal of infectious diseases : an official publication of the Brazilian Society of Infectious DiseasesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCandida bloodstream infections carry a significant mortality risk, justifying the importance of adequate antifungal therapy. This study describes trends in antifungal consumption using the Defined Daily Dose (DDD) and Days of Therapy (DOT) metrics, identifies the microbiological profile, the time to initiation of empirical therapy, the adjustment after positive blood culture results for Candida, and the impact on in-hospital mortality rate in patients with candidemia.
methodsAn analysis of antifungal consumption from 2008 to 2016, and of candidemia cases from 2012 to 2016 was carried out in a private tertiary hospital.
resultsA total of 11,273 admissions were identified with a prescription for at least one type of antifungal therapy. Fluconazole was the most prescribed antifungal drug in terms of general consumption. Through the DDD and DOT metrics, we observed that over time, there was an increase in the consumption of liposomal amphotericin B, micafungin and voriconazole. Candida albicans was the most isolated species in blood cultures. Regarding candidemia, we analyzed samples from 115 patients. Empirical therapy was started within 24 h of blood culture in 44.3% of the cases, and in 81.7% of the cases, the antifungal was deemed to be adequate based in antifungal susceptibility testing, both of which were not associated with the in-hospital mortality rate.
conclusionsOur study reinforces the importance of monitoring the consumption of antifungal agents, which helps in proposing actions that lead to their rational use and, consequently, reduces the appearance of resistant strains.
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.