ArticleHeliyon2022
Antimicrobial use and mortality among intensive care unit patients with bloodstream infections: implications for stewardship programs.
Article in Heliyon, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Healthcare resource utilization and readmission outcomes in patients treated with ceftolozane/tazobactam: real-world insights from the multinational SPECTRA study.JAC-antimicrobial resistance · 2026Article
- Clinical characteristics and prognosis analysis of pseudomonas aeruginosa bloodstream infection in adults: a retrospective study.Clinical and experimental medicine · 2024Article
- Diagnostic value of metagenomic next-generation sequencing in sepsis and bloodstream infection.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2023Article
- Clinical characteristics of bloodstream infections in adult patients with solid tumours and a nomogram for mortality prediction: a 5-year case-controlled retrospective study in a tertiary-level hospital.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2023Article
- Characterization of antibiotic prescription in intensive care units according to the Access, Watch, and Reserve classification.Revista CuidarteArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Bloodstream infections (BSIs) are one of the most critical illnesses requiring intensive care unit (ICU) admission. Antimicrobial therapy (AMT) is one of the vital management strategies for the treatment of BSIs; it should be chosen appropriately to reduce mortality. Objectives: This is the first study to investigate the types of antimicrobial agents administered in the ICU setting and the predictor variables associated with mortality. Methods: This retrospective study was conducted at King Abdullah University Hospital (KAUH). All hospitalized patients admitted to the ICU and received at least one antimicrobial agent over 3 years period (January 1, 2017, to December 31, 2019) were included in the study. Electronic patients' medical records were used to collect patients' demographic and clinical characteristics, patient general health status, events that occurred during hospitalization, and events after obtaining the blood culture. Descriptive analysis was done to identify the types of antimicrobials used and the distribution of the microorganisms among the study participants. The susceptibility test of the bloodstream culture was checked for each patient Results: A total of 1051 patients were enrolled in the study, where 650 patients (61.84%) were treated with three or more antimicrobial agents. The most frequent antimicrobials used were piperacillin/tazobactam followed by teicoplanin, meropenem, and levofloxacin. About half of the patients died within 30-days of BSI, which was associated with several factors including advanced age, presence of co-morbidities, nosocomial infections or healthcare-associated infections, length of ICU stay, respiratory tract infections, receiving vasopressor during the hospital stay, concurrent positive culture other than blood with BSI, receiving combination antimicrobial therapy, those who were complicated with septic shock or renal failure, receiving total parenteral protein (TPN) nutrition, and inappropriate empiric antimicrobial therapy. Conclusion: In conclusion, the administration of the antimicrobials among ICU patients was highly based on a combination of three or more agents covering a broad spectrum of microorganisms. The mortality rate was high among patients which were associated with inappropriate empirical therapy. Therefore, the antimicrobial stewardship (ASP) protocol has to be evaluated in the hospital for ICU patients. Moreover, we suggest recommending that hospital policies should apply the ASP protocol, infection control, implement the antimicrobial de-escalation protocol, and do best controlling on the co-morbid conditions, especially for ages 65 years or more to reduce the mortality rate in the ICU.
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.