Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30212477›Full record

Observational studyPloS one2018

Antibiotic usage in surgical prophylaxis: A prospective observational study in the surgical ward of Nekemte referral hospital.

Getachew Alemkere

Open access · goldAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
42citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
11.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

42 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 93 citations in OpenAlex.

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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Getachew AlemkereDepartment of Pharmacology and Clinical Pharmacy, School of Pharmacy, College of Health Science, Addis Ababa University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.ORCID 0000-0002-8728-7600
Addis Ababa University · ET

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSurgical antimicrobial prophylaxis guidelines are considered as important interventional tools for antimicrobial resistance. Guideline compliance was poor across different countries and thus results in an inappropriate and overuse of antibiotics.

objectiveTo evaluate the selection, timing and duration of prophylactic antibiotic administration among surgical patients in Nekmte referral hospital.

methodProspective, facility based cross-sectional study was conducted from 1st April to 30th June 2017. Data were collected using data abstraction format among surgical inpatients prescribed with surgical antibiotic prophylaxis. Surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis guidelines were used as data assessment protocols. SPSS version 21.0 was used for data entry and analysis. Descriptive statistics and binary logistic regression were used for analysis.

resultsThe median age of the study participants was 35.0 (IQR: 25-50) years with the preponderance (58.8%) of male patients. The median hospitalization period was 8.0 (IQR: 5-11) days. Majority of the participants were from the general surgical ward (60.1%). About 43% of the procedures were clean. Most of the surgical cases were gastrointestinal (39.2%). Only 10.6% of the drug selections comply with American Society of Health-System Pharmacists guideline. Surprisingly, none of the selections were compliant to the national Standard Treatment Guideline of the country. About 84% of the study participants received ceftriaxone. Majority of the prophylactic antibiotics (75.8%) were administered for greater than 24 hours and above half (52.3%) of the antibiotics were administered preoperatively. Emergent surgery procedures (AOR = 2.89, 95% CI: (1.09-9.10) and being a male patient (AOR = 3.10, 95% CI: 1.07-8.98) were associated with inappropriate preoperative antibiotic administration. Patients admitted to the gynecology and obstetrics ward was less likely to receive surgical prophylaxis for greater than 24 hours (AOR = 0.07, 95% CI: 0.01-0.81).

conclusionSurgical antibiotic compliance was far below the guideline recommendation. Patients admitted in the gynecology and obstetrics ward were more likely to comply with the surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis duration recommendation. The timing was most likely to be inappropriate among male patients and patients on emergent surgery. Availability and awareness creation on the antibiotic drugs and the guidelines were important interventions recommended for appropriate surgical antimicrobial use.

Indexed as

AdultAnti-Bacterial AgentsAntibiotic ProphylaxisAwarenessCeftriaxoneCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansLogistic ModelsMaleProspective StudiesSurgical Wound InfectionAnti-Bacterial AgentsCeftriaxone

Identifiers

PMID30212477
PMCPMC6136737
OpenAlexW2890495322

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.