ArticleDrug, healthcare and patient safety2018
Evaluation of vancomycin therapy in the adult ICUs of a teaching hospital in southern Iran.
Article in Drug, healthcare and patient safety, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pharmacokinetic assessment of vancomycin in critically ill patients and nephrotoxicity prediction using individualized pharmacokinetic parameters.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Article
- Evaluation of vancomycin use in university-affiliated hospitals in Southern Khorasan Province (East Iran) based on HICPAC guidelines.Drug, healthcare and patient safety · 2019Article
- Evaluation of aminoglycosides utilization in intensive care units of a teaching hospital in southern Iran.Pharmacy practiceArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVancomycin resistance in intensive care units (ICUs) accounts for significant morbidity and excess costs. The objective of the present study was to determine the appropriateness of vancomycin use in the various ICUs of Nemazee Hospital, Shiraz, Iran.
methodsThis prospective study was performed on 95 critically ill patients (48 males and 47 females) who were treated with vancomycin for at least 3 subsequent doses in 6 ICUs during 12 months. Required demographic, clinical, and paraclinical data were collected by a pharmacist. Fifteen indexes were considered for evaluation of vancomycin use.
resultsVentilator-associated hospital-acquired pneumonia (22.6%), sepsis (22.1%) and CNS infection (12.6%) were found to be the most important indications for vancomycin prescription. Vancomycin was prescribed empirically in 81% of patients. None of the patients received loading dose, and most of the patients received fixed dose. The rate of prolonged empiric antibiotic therapy was 68.5% in patients who received vancomycin. The mean score of vancomycin use in the ICUs of Nemazee Hospital was 7.1±0.6 out of 15, implying that the rate of vancomycin use was in accordance with the guideline proposed by the Department of Clinical Pharmacy of Nemazee Hospital based on Infectious Diseases Society of America by 47.3%.
conclusionBased on our results, the weakness in using vancomycin was related to not administering loading dose, the practice of prescribing fixed-dose vancomycin and prolonged duration of empiric therapy. Efforts to improve the pattern of vancomycin prescription and utilization in these ICUs should be undertaken.
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.