SynthesisRevista espanola de quimioterapia : publicacion oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Quimioterapia2021
Antimicrobial stewardship programs in emergency departments: how do we measure antimicrobial use? A systematic review.
Synthesis in Revista espanola de quimioterapia : publicacion oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Quimioterapia, 2021. 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, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Antibiotic stewardship programs in the Spanish emergency services: PROA-URG Study].Revista espanola de quimioterapia : publicacion oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Quimioterapia · 2024Article
- The impact of a non-restrictive Antimicrobial Stewardship Program in the emergency department of a secondary-level Italian hospital.Internal and emergency medicine · 2024Article
- The Interventions and Challenges of Antimicrobial Stewardship in the Emergency Department.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Regional Perspective of Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs in Latin American Pediatric Emergency Departments.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe implementation of antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) has become a usual practice in hospital settings. However, the method for monitoring antimicrobial use in accident and emergency departments (ED) is not yet adequately defined. Thus, the objective of this review is to describe antimicrobial use indicators used by ASPs implemented in ED.
methodsA systematic review was performed based on studies found in the following academic research databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Scopus (Period: January 2000 to December 2019). Controlled clinical trials, before-and-after studies, interrupted time series, and repeated measures studies assessing the impact of ASPs on antimicrobial use in ED were included; studies published in languages other than English or Spanish were excluded from this review.
resultsTwenty-six studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in this systematic review. In total, 15 (62.5%) studies described the ASP team members who collaborated with the ED staff. Most (21; 80.8%) studies used the percentage of patients with an antibiotic prescription as an indicator. Four (15.4%) studies included defined daily dose data. The antibiotic treatment duration was reported in four (15.4%) studies. Only two studies assessed the impact of the ASP using microbiological indicators, both of which used the incidence of infection with Clostridioides difficile as the indicator.
conclusionsThe reports of experiences in implementing ASPs in ED show heterogeneous antimicrobial use indicators, which makes it difficult to compare results. Therefore, antimicrobial use indicators for ASPs must be standardised between hospital units.
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.