ArticleAnnals of burns and fire disasters2020
Antibiotic Usage After Procalcitonin-Guided Therapy Algorithm Implementation In A Burn Intensive Care Unit.
Article in Annals of burns and fire disasters, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Challenges in Antimicrobial Treatment and Antimicrobial Stewardship in Hospital-Acquired Infections in Adult Burn Patients.European burn journal · 2026Review
- Dose Individualisation of Antimicrobials from a Pharmacometric Standpoint: The Current Landscape.Drugs · 2024Review
- Use of procalcitonin as a biomarker for sepsis in pediatric burns.European journal of pediatrics · 2023Observational
- Innate Immune System Response to Burn Damage-Focus on Cytokine Alteration.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
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
The study investigated antibiotic utilization after the implementation of a procalcitonin (PCT)-guided antibiotic algorithm in the burn intensive care unit (BICU) to minimize antibiotic exposure appropriately. An algorithm established the ordering of an initial procalcitonin level, an additional level following 48 hours post-admission, and upon suspicion of sepsis. The primary endpoint was the percent of days on antibiotics in the BICU. Secondary endpoints were the percent of patients reinitiated on antibiotics, length of BICU and hospital stay, and 30-day mortality. Desirability of Outcome Ranking (DOOR) and Response Adjusted for Duration of Antibiotic Risk (RADAR) methodology aided in antibiotic usage evaluation. The retrospective and prospective phases involved five and seven patients in the final analysis, respectively. The median percent of days on antibiotics in the BICU was 33.3% versus 14.3% in the retrospective and prospective phases, respectively (p=0.222). Secondary outcomes evaluated were percent of patients reinitiated on antibiotics at 80.0% versus 28.6% (p=0.242), the median length of BICU stay at 38 days versus 31 days (p=0.465), the median duration of hospital stay at 39 days versus 37 days (p=0.624) and 30-day mortality of one versus zero cases (p=0.417) in the retrospective and prospective group, respectively. The probability of better DOOR with a PCT-guided antibiotic algorithm versus the control group was 95.7% (95% CI, 81.4-99.5%). The benefit of a PCT-guided antibiotic algorithm implementation cannot be determined based on the small sample size producing a lack of internal validity. Future studies warrant utilizing DOOR/RADAR to evaluate antibiotic stewardship strategies in the burn patient population.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33708022PMC7894847What 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.