ArticleInternational journal of critical illness and injury science
Cefazolin and an aminoglycoside compared with cefazolin alone for the antimicrobial prophylaxis of type III open orthopedic fractures.
Article in International journal of critical illness and injury science. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Type III Gustilo-Anderson open fracture does not justify routine prophylactic Gram-negative antibiotic coverage.Scientific reports · 2023Review
- Infection prevention for open fractures: Is antibiotic monotherapy equivalent to multitherapy?International journal of critical illness and injury scienceArticle
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
contextUncertainty of antibiotic prophylaxis of type III open orthopedic fractures still exists. Controversy remains as using cefazolin as a single agent or the addition of an aminoglycoside for broader coverage to prevent infection.
aimsThe aim of the study was to determine if the combination of cefazolin and an aminoglycoside reduced infections compared with cefazolin alone. SUBJECTS AND
methodsThis was a retrospective study inclusive of patients with type III open fracture admitted between January 1, 2010, and August 31, 2014 at a level 1 trauma center, who were prophylactically treated with cefazolin alone or cefazolin and an aminoglycoside. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: All analyses were performed using Microsoft Excel 2010. Chi-square or Fisher's exact tests were used for categorical data and Wilcoxon rank-sum test for skewed continuous data. Logistic regression analysis was performed on all confounding variables with
resultsA significantly higher percentage in the combination group developed infection (6/15 [40%] vs. 8/53 [15.1%],
conclusionsThe results suggest that the addition of an aminoglycoside to cefazolin may not be necessary to prevent infection.
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.