Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35749114›Full record

Trial reportJAMA network open2022

Effect of Automated Telephone Infectious Disease Consultations to Nonacademic Hospitals on 30-Day Mortality Among Patients With Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia: The SUPPORT Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.

Sebastian Weis, Stefan Hagel, Julia Palm, André Scherag, Steffi Kolanos, Christina Bahrs, Bettina Löffler, Roland P H Schmitz, Florian Rißner, Frank M Brunkhorst and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in JAMA network open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Adherence toAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Frontiers in immunology · 2023
    Article
  7. 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

12 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Sebastian WeisInstitute for Infectious Diseases and Infection Control, Jena University Hospital, Friedrich-Schiller University, Jena, Germany.
Stefan HagelInstitute for Infectious Diseases and Infection Control, Jena University Hospital, Friedrich-Schiller University, Jena, Germany.
Julia PalmInstitute of Medical Statistics, Computer, and Data Sciences, Jena University Hospital, Friedrich-Schiller University, Jena, Germany.
André ScheragInstitute of Medical Statistics, Computer, and Data Sciences, Jena University Hospital, Friedrich-Schiller University, Jena, Germany.
Steffi KolanosInstitute for Infectious Diseases and Infection Control, Jena University Hospital, Friedrich-Schiller University, Jena, Germany.
Christina BahrsInstitute for Infectious Diseases and Infection Control, Jena University Hospital, Friedrich-Schiller University, Jena, Germany.
Bettina LöfflerInstitute of Medical Microbiology, Jena University Hospital, Friedrich-Schiller University, Jena, Germany.
Roland P H SchmitzCenter for Clinical Studies, Jena University Hospital, Friedrich-Schiller University, Jena, Germany.
Florian RißnerCenter for Clinical Studies, Jena University Hospital, Friedrich-Schiller University, Jena, Germany.
Frank M BrunkhorstCenter for Clinical Studies, Jena University Hospital, Friedrich-Schiller University, Jena, Germany.
Mathias W PletzInstitute for Infectious Diseases and Infection Control, Jena University Hospital, Friedrich-Schiller University, Jena, Germany.
SUPPORT Study Group
Clinical Study Center of Asheville · USJena University Hospital · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia (SAB) is a common and potentially severe infectious disease (ID). Retrospective studies and derived meta-analyses suggest that bedside infectious disease consultation (IDC) for SAB is associated with improved survival; however, such IDCs might not always be possible because of the lack of ID specialists, particularly at nonacademic hospitals. Objectives: To investigate whether unsolicited telephone IDCs (triggered by an automated blood stream infection reporting system) to nonacademic hospitals improved 30-day all-cause mortality in patients with SAB. Design, Setting, and Participants: This patient-blinded, multicenter, interventional, cluster randomized, controlled, crossover clinical trial was conducted in 21 rural, nonacademic hospitals in Thuringia, Germany. From July 1, 2016, to December 31, 2018, 1029 blood culture reports were assessed for eligibility. A total of 386 patients were enrolled, whereas 643 patients were not enrolled for the following reasons: death before enrollment (n = 59); palliative care (n = 41); recurrence of SAB (n = 9); discharge from the hospital before enrollment (n = 77); age younger than 18 years (n = 5); duplicate report from a single patient (n = 26); late report (n = 17); blood culture reported during the washout phase (n = 48); and no signed informed consent for other or unknown reasons (n = 361). Interventions: During the ID intervention phase, ID specialists from Jena University Hospital provided unsolicited telephone IDCs to physicians treating patients with SAB. During the control phase, patients were treated according to local standards. Crossover was performed after including 15 patients or, at the latest, 1 year after the first patient was included. Main Outcomes and Measures: Thirty-day all-cause mortality. Results: A total of 386 patients (median [IQR] age, 75 [63-82] years; 261 [67.6%] male) were included, with 177 randomized to the IDC group and 209 to the control group. The 30-day all-cause mortality rate did not differ between the IDC and control groups (relative risk reduction [RRR], 0.12; 95% CI, -2.17 to 0.76; P = .81). No evidence was found of a difference in secondary outcomes, including 90-day mortality (RRR, 0.17; 95% CI, -0.59 to 0.57; P = .62), 90-day recurrence (RRR, 0.10; 95% CI, -2.51 to 0.89; P = .89), and hospital readmission (RRR, 0.04; 95% CI, -0.63 to 0.48; P = .90). Exploratory evidence suggested that indicators of quality of care were potentially realized more often in the IDC group than in the control group (relative quality improvement, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.08-0.26; P = .01). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cluster randomized clinical trial, unsolicited telephone IDC, although potentially enhancing quality of care, did not improve 30-day all-cause mortality in patients with SAB. Trial Registration: drks.de Identifier: DRKS00010135.

Indexed as

BacteremiaCommunicable DiseasesStaphylococcal InfectionsAdolescentAgedFemaleHospitalsHumansMaleReferral and ConsultationRetrospective StudiesStaphylococcus aureusTelephoneTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID35749114
PMCPMC9233240
OpenAlexW4283368162

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.