Observational studyEuropean journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice2022
Does the use of new cephalosporins follow the authorised, financed and approved indications? A study of their use in routine clinical practice in a tertiary hospital.
Observational study in European journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice, 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.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate the appropriateness of ceftazidime-avibactam (C-A), ceftolozane-tazobactam (C-T) and ceftaroline prescriptions according to European Medicines Agency (EMA)/Spanish Agency of Medicines and Medical Devices (AEMPS) approved indications, financed indications in the Spanish health system and hospital Infection Commission (IC) recommendations in a tertiary hospital.
methodsObservational, descriptive and retrospective study of inpatients aged ≥18 years, who were prescribed the above-mentioned antimicrobials during the period January-December 2020. Variables obtained were demographic (sex and age), pharmacological (antibiotic, use - empiric or targeted, indication) and microbiological (sensitivity testing and antibiotic tested) data.
resultsA total of 79 patients were included. C-A (n=40): 67.5% of patients were male, with a mean age of 61 (range 22-87) years. Empiric treatment was applied in 30% of the cases (n=12). De-escalation in 33.33% of individuals. Sensitivity testing was done in 92.86% of patients, including C-A in 57.69% of them. C-T (n=19): 89.47% of patients were male, with a mean age of 65 (range 18-82) years. An empiric approach was followed in 5.26% of subjects; de-escalation was performed in all cases due to culture with multidrug-resistant (MDR)
conclusionsOur results highlight the importance of stewardship programmes in the decision-making process and in the follow-up of patients with infections caused by MDR microorganisms.
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.