Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30054786›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2018

Utilization of surgical antibiotic prophylaxis for obstetrics and gynaecology surgeries in Northern Nigeria.

U Abubakar, S A Syed Sulaiman, A G Adesiyun

Abstract readMulticenter Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
6.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 50 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

U AbubakarDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, George Town, Penang, Malaysia. pharmumma2@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7549-2877
S A Syed SulaimanDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, George Town, Penang, Malaysia.
A G AdesiyunAhmadu Bello University Teaching Hospital, Zaria, Nigeria.
Universiti Sains Malaysia · MYAhmadu Bello University Teaching Hospital · NG

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background Audit of antibiotic prophylaxis is an important strategy used to identify areas where stewardship interventions are required. Objectives To evaluate compliance with surgical antibiotic prophylaxis in obstetrics and gynaecology surgeries and determine the Defined Daily Dose (DDD) of antibiotic. Settings Three public tertiary hospitals located in Northern Nigeria. Methods This prospective study included women who had obstetrics and gynaecology surgeries with no infection at the time of incision. Appropriateness of antibiotic prophylaxis was determined by a clinical pharmacist. DDD of antibiotics was determined using ATC/DDD index 2017 from the World Health Organization Collaborating Centre for Drugs Statistics Methodology. Main outcome measure Compliance with antibiotic prophylaxis and DDD of antibiotic per procedure. Results A total of 248 procedures were included (mean age: 31.7 ± 7.9 years). Nitroimidazole in combination with either beta-lactam/beta-lactamase inhibitor or third generation cephalosporin were the most prescribed antibiotics. Redundant anaerobic antibiotic combination was detected in 71.4% of the procedures. Timing of antibiotic prophylaxis was optimal in 16.5% while duration of prophylaxis was prolonged in all the procedures (mean duration was 8.7 ± 1.0 days). The DDD of antibiotics prophylaxis was 16.75 DDD/procedure. Antibiotic utilisation was higher in caesarean section and myomectomy (17.9 DDD/procedure) than hysterectomy (14.5 DDD/procedure); P < 0.001. Redundant metronidazole represents one-third of total DDD and 87% of the DDD for metronidazole. Conclusion Excessive and inappropriate use of antibiotic prophylaxis was observed in women who had obstetrics and gynaecology surgeries. These observations underline the need for antimicrobial stewardship interventions to improve antibiotic use.

Indexed as

AdultAntibiotic ProphylaxisFemaleGynecologic Surgical ProceduresHumansInappropriate PrescribingNigeriaObstetric Surgical ProceduresProspective StudiesSurgical Wound InfectionAntibiotic prophylaxisAntibiotic utilisationDefined Daily DoseGynaecologyNigeriaObstetricsRedundant antibiotic

Identifiers

PMID30054786
OpenAlexW2883589651

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.