ArticleInfection control and hospital epidemiology2021
Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales bacteriuria and subsequent bacteremia: A population-based study.
Article in Infection control and hospital epidemiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Epidemiology and risk factors of multidrug-resistant organisms in a Chinese tertiary hospital: a 10-year retrospective cohort study across the COVID-19 policy phases, 2013-2023.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026Article
- Article
- Development of a risk prediction model for subsequent infection after colonization with carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales: a retrospective cohort study.Antimicrobial resistance and infection control · 2024Article
- Evaluating indwelling devices and other risk factors for mortality in invasive Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales infections in Georgia, 2012-2019.Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE · 2024Article
- Cefiderocol, a Siderophore Cephalosporin, as a Treatment Option for Infections Caused by Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacterales.Infectious diseases and therapy · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo describe the epidemiology of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE) bacteriuria and to determine whether urinary catheters increase the risk of subsequent CRE bacteremia.
designUsing active population- and laboratory-based surveillance we described a cohort of patients with incident CRE bacteriuria and identified risk factors for developing CRE bacteremia within 1 year.
settingThe study was conducted among the 8 counties of Georgia Health District 3 (HD3) in Atlanta, Georgia. PATIENTS: Residents of HD3 with CRE first identified in urine between 2012 and 2017.
resultsWe identified 464 patients with CRE bacteriuria (mean yearly incidence, 1.96 cases per 100,000 population). Of 425 with chart review, most had a urinary catheter (56%), and many resided in long-term care facilities (48%), had a Charlson comorbidity index >3 (38%) or a decubitus ulcer (37%). 21 patients (5%) developed CRE bacteremia with the same organism within 1 year. Risk factors for subsequent bacteremia included presence of a urinary catheter (odds ratio [OR], 8.0; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.8-34.9), central venous catheter (OR, 4.3; 95% CI, 1.7-10.6) or another indwelling device (OR, 4.3; 95% CI, 1.6-11.4), urine culture obtained as an inpatient (OR, 5.7; 95% CI, 1.3-25.9), and being in the ICU in the week prior to urine culture (OR, 2.9; 95% CI, 1.1-7.8). In a multivariable analysis, urinary catheter increased the risk of CRE bacteremia (OR, 5.3; 95% CI, 1.2-23.6).
conclusionsIn patients with CRE bacteriuria, urinary catheters increase the risk of CRE bacteremia. Future interventions should aim to reduce inappropriate insertion and early removal of urinary catheters.
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.