Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36755637›Full record

ArticleIndian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine2022

New Antibiotic Prescription Pattern in Critically Ill Patients ("Ant-critic"): Prospective Observational Study from an Indian Intensive Care Unit.

Supradip Ghosh, Ripenmeet Salhotra, Amandeep Singh, Aditya Lyall, Garima Arora, Niranjan Kumar, Aayush Chawla, Meenakshi Gupta

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Modification of Initial Empirical Antibiotic Prescription and its Impact on Patient Outcome: Experience of an Indian Intensive Care Unit.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2023
    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

8 authors.

Supradip GhoshDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Fortis Escorts Hospital, Faridabad, Haryana, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7892-2078
Ripenmeet SalhotraDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Amrita Hospital, Faridabad, Haryana, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8987-6102
Amandeep SinghDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Fortis Escorts Hospital, Faridabad, Haryana, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5399-4801
Aditya LyallDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Fortis Escorts Hospital, Faridabad, Haryana, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7630-1809
Garima AroraDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Werribee Mercy Hospital, Werribee, Victoria, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9019-0634
Niranjan KumarDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Mediversal Multi Superspeciality Hospital, Kankarbagh, Patna, Bihar, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5379-4698
Aayush ChawlaDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Amrita Hospital, Faridabad, Haryana, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9545-5299
Meenakshi GuptaDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Fortis Escorts Hospital, Faridabad, Haryana, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8008-9866

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: This study aimed to address the issue of antibiotic prescription processes in an Indian Intensive care unit (ICUs). Materials and methods: In a prospective longitudinal study, all adult patients admitted in the ICU for 24 hours or above between 01 June 2020 and 31 July 2021 were screened for any new antibiotic prescription throughout their ICU stay. All new antibiotic prescriptions were assessed for baseline variables at prescription, any modifications during the course, and the outcome of antibiotic prescription. Results: A total of 1014 patients fulfilled entry criteria; 59.2 and 7.2% of days they were on a therapeutic and prophylactic antibiotic(s). Patients, who were prescribed therapeutic antibiotic(s), had worse ICU outcomes. A total of 49.5% of patients (502 of 1,014) received a total of 552 new antibiotic prescriptions during their ICU stay. About 92.13% of these prescriptions were empirical and blood or other specimens were sent for culture in 78.81 and 60.04% of instances. A total of 31.7% of episodes were microbiologically proven and were more likely to be prescribed by an ICU consultant. A total of 169 modifications were done in 142 prescription episodes; 73 of them after sensitivity results. Thus, the overall rate of de-escalation was 13.95%. Apart from the negative culture result (36.05%), an important reason for a relatively low rate of de-escalation was the absence of sampling (12.32%). Longer ICU stay before antibiotic prescription, underlying chronic liver disease (CLD), worse organ dysfunction, and septic shock were independently associated with unfavorable treatment outcomes. No such independent association was observed between antibiotic appropriateness and patient outcome. Conclusion: Future antibiotic stewardship strategies should address issues of high empirical prescription and poor microbiological sampling hindering the de-escalation process. How to cite this article: Ghosh S, Salhotra R, Singh A, Lyall A, Arora G, Kumar N,

Indexed as

Antibiotic(s)Intensive care unitPatient outcomePrescription process

Identifiers

PMID36755637
PMCPMC9886023

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.