Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29878219›Full record

SynthesisThe Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy2018

Variation in antibiotic use among and within different settings: a systematic review.

Veronica Zanichelli, Annelie A Monnier, Inge C Gyssens, Niels Adriaenssens, Ann Versporten, Céline Pulcini, Marion Le Maréchal, Gianpiero Tebano, Vera Vlahovic-Palcevski, Mirjana Stanic Benic and 4 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

44 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 66 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Antibiotic use in Brazilian hospitals in the 21st century: a systematic review.Revista da Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Tropical · 2021
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Hospital Antimicrobial Purchasing in Canada (2018-2021): An Exploratory Analysis.Journal of the Association of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Disease Canada = Journal officiel de l'Association pour la microbiologie medicale et l'infectiologie Canada · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Drug resistance and genotyping studies ofFrontiers in veterinary science · 2025
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Excellence in Antibiotic Stewardship: A Mixed-Methods Study Comparing High-, Medium-, and Low-Performing Hospitals.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2024
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
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

14 authors at 5 institutions in 5 countries.

Veronica ZanichelliInfection Control Program, Geneva University Hospitals and Faculty of Medicine, Geneva, Switzerland.
Annelie A MonnierDepartment of Internal Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Inge C GyssensDepartment of Internal Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Niels AdriaenssensLaboratory of Medical Microbiology, Vaccine & Infectious Disease Institute (VAXINFECTIO), University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium.
Ann VersportenLaboratory of Medical Microbiology, Vaccine & Infectious Disease Institute (VAXINFECTIO), University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium.
Céline PulciniUniversité de Lorraine, CHRU-Nancy, Infectious Diseases Department, F-54000 Nancy, France.
Marion Le MaréchalUniversité de Lorraine, APEMAC, F-54000 Nancy, France.
Gianpiero TebanoUniversité de Lorraine, APEMAC, F-54000 Nancy, France.
Vera Vlahovic-PalcevskiDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology, University Hospital Rijeka, Rijeka, Croatia.
Mirjana Stanic BenicDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology, University Hospital Rijeka, Rijeka, Croatia.
Romina MilanicUniversity of Rijeka, Medical Faculty, Rijeka, Croatia.
Stephan HarbarthInfection Control Program, Geneva University Hospitals and Faculty of Medicine, Geneva, Switzerland.
Marlies E HulscherScientific Center for Quality of Healthcare (IQ Healthcare), Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Benedikt HuttnerInfection Control Program, Geneva University Hospitals and Faculty of Medicine, Geneva, Switzerland.
Interdisciplinarité en Santé Publique Interventions et Instruments de mesure complexes – Région Est · FRRadboud University Nijmegen · NLUniversity Hospital of Geneva · CHUniversity of Rijeka · HRUniversity of Antwerp · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: Variation in antibiotic use may reflect inappropriate use. We aimed to systematically describe the variation in measures for antibiotic use among settings or providers. This study was conducted as part of the innovative medicines initiative (IMI)-funded international project DRIVE-AB. Methods: We searched for studies published in MEDLINE from January 2004 to January 2015 reporting variation in measures for systemic antibiotic use (e.g. DDDs) in inpatient and outpatient settings. The ratio between a study's reported maximum and minimum values of a given measure [maximum:minimum ratio (MMR)] was calculated as a measure of variation. Similar measures were grouped into categories and when possible the overall median ratio and IQR were calculated. Results: One hundred and forty-three studies were included, of which 85 (59.4%) were conducted in Europe and 12 (8.4%) in low- to middle-income countries. Most studies described the variation in the quantity of antibiotic use in the inpatient setting (81/143, 56.6%), especially among hospitals (41/81, 50.6%). The most frequent measure was DDDs with different denominators, reported in 23/81 (28.4%) inpatient studies and in 28/62 (45.2%) outpatient studies. For this measure, we found a median MMR of 3.7 (IQR 2.6-5.0) in 4 studies reporting antibiotic use in ICUs in DDDs/1000 patient-days and a median MMR of 2.3 (IQR 1.5-3.2) in 18 studies reporting outpatient antibiotic use in DDDs/1000 inhabitant-days. Substantial variation was also identified in other measures. Conclusions: Our review confirms the large variation in antibiotic use even across similar settings and providers. Data from low- and middle-income countries are under-represented. Further studies should try to better elucidate reasons for the observed variation to facilitate interventions that reduce unwarranted practice variation. In addition, the heterogeneity of reported measures clearly shows that there is need for standardization.

Indexed as

Drug Utilization ReviewAnti-Bacterial AgentsDelivery of Health CareEuropeHealth PersonnelHospitalsHumansIncomeInpatientsOutpatientsAnti-Bacterial Agents

Identifiers

PMID29878219
PMCPMC5989604
OpenAlexW2806451194

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.