ArticleAmerican journal of clinical pathology2022
Prevalence of Discordant Procalcitonin Use at an Academic Medical Center.
Article in American journal of clinical pathology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesDespite multiple trials demonstrating that procalcitonin (PCT) is an effective tool for antibiotic stewardship, inconsistent application in real-world settings continues to fuel controversy regarding its clinical utility. We sought to determine rates of concordance between PCT results and antibiotic prescribing in hospitalized patients.
methodsWe performed a retrospective review of all inpatient encounters at an academic tertiary care health system with a PCT result between February 2017 and October 2019. Concordant prescribing was defined as starting or continuing antibiotics following an elevated PCT (>0.5 ng/mL) finding and withholding or stopping antibiotics following a low PCT (< 0.1 ng/mL) finding.
resultsAntibiotic prescribing decisions were discordant from the PCT level in 32.5% of our sample. Among patients not receiving antibiotics at the time of testing, 25.9% (430 of 1,662) were prescribed antibiotics despite a low PCT result. Among patients already receiving antibiotics, treatment was continued despite a low PCT level in 80.4% (728 of 906) of cases. Enhanced decision support tools introduced during the study period had no impact on PCT use for antibiotic decisions.
conclusionsOverall concordance between PCT results and antibiotic use is relatively low in a real-world setting. The potential value of PCT for antibiotic stewardship may not be fully realized.
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.