Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34799754›Full record

ReviewEuropean journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology2022

Impact of multiplexed respiratory viral panels on infection control measures and antimicrobial stewardship: a review of the literature.

Jense Wils, Veroniek Saegeman, Annette Schuermans

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jense WilsDepartment of Infection Control, UZ Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. jensewils1987@gmail.com.
Veroniek SaegemanDepartment of Infection Control, UZ Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Annette SchuermansDepartment of Infection Control, UZ Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Universitair Ziekenhuis Leuven · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Multiplexed respiratory viral panels (MRVP) have recently been added to the diagnostic work-up of respiratory infections. This review provides a summary of the main literature of MRVP for patients with regard to 3 different topics. Can the results of MRVP reduce the inappropriate use of antibiotics, can they guide the use of appropriate antiviral therapy and do they have an added value with respect to infection control measures? Literature was searched for based on a defined search string using both the PubMed and Embase database. Twenty-five articles report on the impact of MRVP on antibiotic therapy. In all the articles where active antimicrobial stewardship was performed (e.g., education/advice on interpreting results of MRVP) (N = 9), a reduction in antibiotic therapy was shown (with exception of 2 studies). Three studies evaluating the effect of MRVP on antimicrobial use in a population that is not suspected of having bacterial pneumonia (e.g., absence of radiology suggestive for bacterial infection or low PCT) found a positive impact on antibiotic therapy. Eight studies with a short TAT (< 7 h) had a positive impact on use of antibiotic therapy. Eleven studies focused on the impact of MRVP on antiviral use. In contrast to antibiotic reduction, all studies systematically objectified improved antiviral use as a consequence of MRVP results. With regard to the impact of MRVP on infection control, eleven articles were withheld. All these studies led to a more accurate use of infection control measures by detecting unidentified pathogens or stopping isolation precautions in case of a negative MRVP result. MRVP don't reduce antibiotic therapy in all populations. Reduction seems more likely if the following factors are present: active antimicrobial stewardship, low likelihood of a bacterial infection, and a short turnaround time to result. With respect to antiviral therapy, all studies have an impact but the targeted use of antivirals is so far not that evidence based for all viral respiratory pathogens. Regarding infection control measures, the potential impact of MRVP is high because of the need of additional isolation precautions for many respiratory viruses, although logistical problems can occur.

Indexed as

VirusesAnti-Bacterial AgentsAnti-Infective AgentsAntimicrobial StewardshipAntiviral AgentsDatabases, FactualHumansInfection ControlPneumonia, BacterialRespiratory Tract InfectionsAnti-Bacterial AgentsAnti-Infective AgentsAntiviral AgentsAntimicrobial stewardshipInfection controlMultiplexRespiratory

Identifiers

PMID34799754
PMCPMC8604699
OpenAlexW3214010035

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.