Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31497412›Full record

ArticleCureus2019

Evaluation of Antibiotic Prophylaxis and Discharge Prescriptions in the General Surgery Department.

Cem Karaali, Mustafa Emiroğlu, Bülent Çalık, Ismaıl Sert, Eyup Kebapci, Tayfun Kaya, Gokcen G Budak, Gökhan Akbulut, Cengiz Aydın

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Cem KaraaliGeneral Surgery, University of Health Sciences Tepecik Training and Research Hospital, Izmir, TUR.
Mustafa EmiroğluGeneral Surgery, University of Health Sciences Tepecik Training and Research Hospital, Izmir, TUR.
Bülent ÇalıkGeneral Surgery, University of Health Sciences Tepecik Training and Research Hospital, Izmir, TUR.
Ismaıl SertGeneral Surgery, University of Health Sciences Tepecik Training and Research Hospital, Izmir, TUR.
Eyup KebapciGeneral Surgery, University of Health Sciences Tepecik Training and Research Hospital, Izmir, TUR.
Tayfun KayaGeneral Surgery, University of Health Sciences Tepecik Training and Research Hospital, Izmir, TUR.
Gokcen G BudakInfectious Diseases, Sakarya University, Sakarya, TUR.
Gökhan AkbulutGeneral Surgery, University of Health Sciences Tepecik Training and Research Hospital, Izmir, TUR.
Cengiz AydınGeneral Surgery, University of Health Sciences Tepecik Training and Research Hospital, Izmir, TUR.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction Although there are international guidelines for surgical antibiotic prophylaxis (SP), the use of inappropriate SP is still a common problem. Most studies investigated SP applications in clean and clean-contaminated cases. However, antibiotics in the discharge prescriptions of these cases have not been adequately investigated. In this study, we aimed to examine the antibiotics in SP applications and discharged prescriptions together and to find out the causes of inappropriate use. Materials and methods We retrospectively evaluated the data of patients admitted to our general surgery wards between 2014 and 2015. Patients with clean or clean-contaminated wound category operations were included. The patients were evaluated in terms of convenience of SP (choice of antibiotics, compliance with an indication for SP, timing of the first dose, SP>24 hours, and discharge prescription). In addition, to interpret the results, a questionnaire has been performed for the surgeons in the same clinics. Results A total of 1205 patients with clean and clean-contaminated wound class operation were enrolled in this study. The total accuracy rate of SP was 7.1%. SP application with the correct indication and timing of the first dose was compatible with guidelines: 55.6% and 81.9%, respectively. SP was applied >24 hours at 60.2% and antibiotic prescribing carried out after discharge at 80.6% of patients. According to questionnaire results, the use of SP over 24 hours and the prescription of antibiotics during discharge were: drain usage, hyperthermia, leukocytosis, surgeons feeling of comfort, avoidance of patients, and their relatives' reactions. Conclusion The total accuracy rate of SP rate was low in the present study and in surgeons prescribing the SP after discharge. In light of the present study, we suggest that discharge prescriptions should also be reviewed in clinics who have a high inappropriate surgical antibiotic prophylaxis rate.

Indexed as

inappropriate discharge prescriptionquestionnairesurgical antibiotic prophylaxis

Identifiers

PMID31497412
PMCPMC6726339

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.