ArticlePharmacy (Basel, Switzerland)2019
Implementation of an Extended-Infusion Piperacillin-Tazobactam Dosing Protocol: Unexpected Findings when Monitoring Safety and Compliance with Smart Pump Technology.
Article in Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Implementation of Piperacillin-Tazobactam Continuous Infusions for Critically Ill Patients: A Single-Centre Retrospective Chart Review.The Canadian journal of hospital pharmacy · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Compliance with recommended infusion rates was evaluated before, during, and after the implementation of extended-infusion (EI) piperacillin-tazobactam at an academic medical center. Software-controlled infusion-pump alert data were studied for piperacillin-tazobactam administrations before and after implementation of a four-hour EI protocol. Compliance was analyzed 16 weeks before (pre-EI), two weeks after (peri-EI), and an additional 16 weeks after (post-EI) protocol implementation. We defined potential harm as a programmed infusion rate exceeding the recommended rate, possible harm as a programmed infusion aborted by the user, and compliance as reversion to recommended rates. Potential and possible harm were standardized to 1000 patient days. Overall, 3110 alerts were identified during the period. Potential harm per 1000 patient days for pre-, peri-, and post-EI were 0, 6.12, and 1.05 (
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.