Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37331935›Full record

ArticleCritical care (London, England)2023

International survey of antibiotic dosing and monitoring in adult intensive care units.

Paul G Williams, Alexis Tabah, Menino Osbert Cotta, Indy Sandaradura, Salmaan Kanji, Marc H Scheetz, Sahand Imani, Muhammed Elhadi, Sònia Luque-Pardos, Natalie Schellack and 7 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Critical care (London, England), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
9.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Vancomycin loading dose and AUCPediatric research · 2026
    Article
  5. Spaced learning versus traditional learning for pharmacists implementing β-lactam therapeutic drug monitoring.American journal of health-system pharmacy : AJHP : official journal of the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

17 authors at 16 institutions in 11 countries.

Paul G WilliamsFaculty of Medicine, University of Queensland Centre for Clinical Research (UQCCR), The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, 4029, Australia. paul.williams3@uqconnect.edu.au.
Alexis TabahFaculty of Medicine, University of Queensland Centre for Clinical Research (UQCCR), The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, 4029, Australia.
Menino Osbert CottaFaculty of Medicine, University of Queensland Centre for Clinical Research (UQCCR), The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, 4029, Australia.
Indy SandaraduraSydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Salmaan KanjiThe Ottawa Hospital and Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Marc H ScheetzPharmacometric Center of Excellence, Departments of Pharmacy Practice and Pharmacology, College of Pharmacy, Midwestern University, Downers Grove, IL, USA.
Sahand ImaniNepean Blue Mountains Local Health District, Nepean Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Muhammed ElhadiFaculty of Medicine, University of Tripoli, Tripoli, Libya.
Sònia Luque-PardosPharmacy Department, Parc de Salut Mar, Barcelona, Spain.
Natalie SchellackDepartment of Pharmacology, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa.
Cristina SanchesCampus Centro Oeste Dona Lindu, Federal University of Sao João del Rei, Divinópolis, Minas Gerais, Brasil.
Jean-Francois TimsitAssistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris - Bichat hospital Medical and infectious diseases ICU (MI2), 75018, Paris, France.
Jiao XieDepartment of Pharmacy, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, China.
Andras FarkasOptimum Dosing Strategies, Bloomingdale, NJ, USA.
Kathryn WilksInfectious Diseases Department, Sunshine Coast University Hospital, Birtinya, QLD, Australia.
Jason A RobertsFaculty of Medicine, University of Queensland Centre for Clinical Research (UQCCR), The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, 4029, Australia.
National Coordinators on behalf of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM) and the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (ESCMID) Study Group for Infections in Critically Ill Patients [ESGCIP]
European Society of Intensive Care Medicine · BEEuropean Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases · CHSunshine Coast University Hospital · AUThe University of Queensland · AUCentro de Investigación Biomédica en Red · ESFederal University of São João del-Rei · BRMidwestern University · USNepean Hospital · AUOptimum Technologies (United States) · USOttawa Hospital · CASecond Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University · CNThe University of Sydney · AUUniversité de Montpellier · FRUniversité Paris Cité · FRUniversity of Pretoria · ZAUniversity of Tripoli · LY

Funding

Australian National Health and Medical Research Council APP2007007Sunshine Coast Hospital and Health Service Study Education Research Trust Fund (SERTF) and Wishlist Clinician Researcher Fellowship
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn recent years, numerous dosing studies have been conducted to optimize therapeutic antibiotic exposures in patients with serious infections. These studies have led to the inclusion of dose optimization recommendations in international clinical practice guidelines. The last international survey describing dosing, administration and monitoring of commonly prescribed antibiotics for critically ill patients was published in 2015 (ADMIN-ICU 2015). This study aimed to describe the evolution of practice since this time.

methodsA cross-sectional international survey distributed through professional societies and networks was used to obtain information on practices used in the dosing, administration and monitoring of vancomycin, piperacillin/tazobactam, meropenem and aminoglycosides.

resultsA total of 538 respondents (71% physicians and 29% pharmacists) from 409 hospitals in 45 countries completed the survey. Vancomycin was mostly administered as an intermittent infusion, and loading doses were used by 74% of respondents with 25 mg/kg and 20 mg/kg the most favoured doses for intermittent and continuous infusions, respectively. Piperacillin/tazobactam and meropenem were most frequently administered as an extended infusion (42% and 51%, respectively). Therapeutic drug monitoring was undertaken by 90%, 82%, 43%, and 39% of respondents for vancomycin, aminoglycosides, piperacillin/tazobactam, and meropenem, respectively, and was more frequently performed in high-income countries. Respondents rarely used dosing software to guide therapy in clinical practice and was most frequently used with vancomycin (11%).

conclusionsWe observed numerous changes in practice since the ADMIN-ICU 2015 survey was conducted. Beta-lactams are more commonly administered as extended infusions, and therapeutic drug monitoring use has increased, which align with emerging evidence.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsVancomycinAdultAminoglycosidesCritical IllnessCross-Sectional StudiesHumansIntensive Care UnitsMeropenemPiperacillinPiperacillin, Tazobactam Drug CombinationSurveys and QuestionnairesAminoglycosidesAnti-Bacterial AgentsMeropenemPiperacillinPiperacillin, Tazobactam Drug CombinationVancomycinAminoglycosidesBeta-lactamsDrug monitoringIntensive care unitsVancomycin

Identifiers

PMID37331935
PMCPMC10278304
OpenAlexW4381158447

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.