Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36308584›Full record

ArticleInternal and emergency medicine2022

The data and the reality: urine cultures and emergency medicine physicians.

Nicolette Rachel Castañeda, Amanda Doodlesack, William Fyfe, Jonathan Edlow, Shamai A Grossman

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Internal and emergency medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 47% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Nicolette Rachel CastañedaDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, One Deaconess Road, Boston, MA, USA. ncastane@bidmc.harvard.edu.ORCID 0000-0001-8923-9963
Amanda DoodlesackDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, One Deaconess Road, Boston, MA, USA.
William FyfeDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, One Deaconess Road, Boston, MA, USA.
Jonathan EdlowDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, One Deaconess Road, Boston, MA, USA.
Shamai A GrossmanDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, One Deaconess Road, Boston, MA, USA.
Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectivesThe IDSA has published guidelines for the treatment of urinary tract infections, recommending limiting treatment to symptomatic patients and pregnant females. Our objective is to elucidate current practice patterns among emergency physicians (EPs) in treating positive urine cultures in various clinical situations.

methodsThis study employed a cross-sectional design utilizing a questionnaire addressing nine common scenarios encountered by EPs in the follow-up of a positive urine culture. The questionnaire was conducted using RedCap and distributed via email to current and former physicians and residents across our hospital network. Demographic information included years of training and practice setting. For each of nine clinical scenarios, Physicians were asked if they would treat with antibiotics. Results were then analyzed by tabulating percentage of responses and 95% confidence intervals.

resultsOf 120 respondents, 40.8% worked in academic centers with emergency medicine residencies, 37.5% in large community hospitals, and 20.67% in small community hospitals. Responses came from 14 residents, 33 attendings < 5 years out of training, 23 attendings 5-9 years out of training, 37 attendings 10-20 years out of training, and 13 attendings > 20 beyond training. Asymptomatic young women were treated by 34.2% (95% CI 25.91-43.46%) while asymptomatic elderly women were treated by 50% (95% CI 40.79-59.21%) of EPs. All EPs (95% CI 96.13-100%) chose to treat a symptomatic male and 99.2% (95% CI 94.77-99.96%) chose to treat an asymptomatic pregnant female. Elderly females after a fall were treated by 63.3% (95% CI 54-71.8%) of EPs while elderly males with confusion and a fall were treated by 96.7% (95% CI 91.18-98.93%). Asymptomatic males with a chronic Foley catheter were treated by 28.2% (95% CI 20.67-37.4%) of EPs and 46.7% (95%CI 37.59-55.97%) would treat an asymptomatic middle-aged female with diabetes. Finally, 92.5% (95% CI 85.85-96.3%) of EPs chose to treat an asymptomatic kidney transplant patient.

conclusionEPs in varied training stages and practice settings have significant practice variation in the treatment of positive urine cultures, particularly in the geriatric population, often prescribing antibiotics to patients where clear, specific and data-driven IDSA guidelines suggest treatment is unnecessary and potentially harmful.

Indexed as

BacteriuriaEmergency MedicinePhysiciansAgedAnti-Bacterial AgentsCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPregnancyAnti-Bacterial AgentsAsymptomatic bacteriuriaEmergencyUrine cultures

Identifiers

PMID36308584
OpenAlexW4307582020

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.