ArticleBMC infectious diseases2020
The impact of diagnostic microbiology on de-escalation of antimicrobial therapy in hospitalised adults.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Garrod lecture: achieving the UNGA AMR mortality reduction goals.The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy · 2026Article
- Clinical impact of broad- versus narrow-spectrum empiric therapy in acute cholangitis: A Japanese claims database study.PloS one · 2026Article
- Clinical utility of CSF metagenomic next-generation sequencing in suspected CNS infection: performance against a composite reference standard and read-count stratification.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026Article
- Qualitative changes in clinical records after implementation of pharmacist-led antimicrobial stewardship program: a text mining analysis.Journal of pharmaceutical health care and sciences · 2025Article
- Carbapenem De-escalation in urinary tract infections: prevalence and outcomes among hospitalized patients.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Predictors for prolonged and escalated perioperative antibiotic therapy after microvascular head and neck reconstruction: a comprehensive analysis of 446 cases.Head & face medicine · 2024Article
- Evaluation of Pharmacy Intern Interventions on Antimicrobial Use in University-Affiliated Hospitals: A Retrospective Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Diagnostic and antibiotic use practices among COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients in the Indonesian National Referral Hospital.PloS one · 2024Article
- Article
- Authors' Reply to Hays: "A Multinational European Study of Patient Preferences for Novel Diagnostics to Manage Antimicrobial Resistance".Applied health economics and health policy · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMinimising antimicrobial overuse is needed to limit antimicrobial resistance. There is little evidence on how often microbiological testing informs antimicrobial de-escalation (e.g. stopping, shortening duration, switching to narrower spectrum or intravenous to oral switch) at 48-72 h "review and revise". We performed a patient level analysis of diagnostic microbiology and antimicrobial prescribing to determine the impact of microbiology results on antimicrobial review outcomes.
methodsAntimicrobial prescribing data were collected for hospitalised adults from across Brighton and Sussex University Hospitals NHS Trust using routine monthly audits of prescribing practice from July 2016 to April 2017. Microbiology testing data for cultures of blood, urine, sputum and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) were gathered from the hospital pathology database and linked to prescriptions with matching patient identification codes. Antimicrobial prescriptions were grouped into "prescription episodes" (PEs), defined as one or more antimicrobials prescribed to the same patient for the same indication. Medical records were reviewed for all PEs with positive microbiology and a randomised sample of those with negative results to assess the impact of the microbiology result on the antimicrobial prescription(s).
resultsAfter excluding topical and prophylactic prescriptions, data were available for 382 inpatient antimicrobial prescriptions grouped into 276 prescription episodes. 162/276 (59%) had contemporaneous microbiology sent. After filtering likely contaminants, 33/276 (12%) returned relevant positive results, of which 20/33 (61%) had antimicrobials changed from empiric therapy as a result with 6/33 (18%) prompting de-escalation. Positive blood and CSF tended to have greater impact than urine or sputum cultures. 124/276 (45%) PEs returned only negative microbiology, and this was documented in the medical notes less often (9/40, 23%) than positive results (28/33, 85%). Out of 40 reviewed PEs with negative microbiology, we identified just one (~ 3%) in which antimicrobials were unambiguously de-escalated following the negative result.
conclusionsThe majority of diagnostic microbiology tests sent to inform clinical management yielded negative results. However, negative microbiology contributed little to clinical decision making about antimicrobial de-escalation, perhaps reflecting a lack of trust in negative results by treating clinicians. Improving the negative predictive value of currently available diagnostic microbiology could help hospital prescribers in de-escalating antimicrobial therapy.
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.