ArticleGMS hygiene and infection control2023
A prospective cluster trial to increase antibiotic prescription quality in seven non-ICU wards.
Article in GMS hygiene and infection control, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: To evaluate general shortcomings and faculty-specific pitfalls as well as to improve antibiotic prescription quality (ABQ) in non-ICU wards, we performed a prospective cluster trial. Methods: An infectious-disease (ID) consulting service performed a prospective investigation consisting of three 12-week phases with point prevalence evaluation conducted once per week (=36 evaluations in total) at seven non-ICU wards, followed by assessment of sustainability (weeks 37-48). Baseline evaluation (phase 1) defined multifaceted interventions by identifying the main shortcomings. Then, to distinguish intervention from time effects, the interventions were performed in four wards, and the 3 remaining wards served as controls; after assessing effects (phase 2), the same interventions were performed in the remaining wards to test the generalizability of the interventions (phase 3). The prolonged responses after all interventions were then analyzed in phase 4. ABQ was evaluated by at least two ID specialists who assessed the indication for therapy, the adherence to the hospital guidelines for empirical therapy, and the overall antibiotic prescription quality. Results: In phase 1, 406 of 659 (62%) patients cases were adequately treated with antibiotics; the main reason for inappropriate prescription was the lack of an indication (107/253; 42%). The antibiotic prescription quality (ABQ) significantly increased, reaching 86% in all wards after the focused interventions (502/584; nDf=3, ddf=1,697, F=6.9, p=0.0001). In phase 2 the effect was only seen in wards that already participated in interventions (248/347; 71%). No improvement was seen in wards that received interventions only after phase 2 (189/295; 64%). A given indication significantly increased from about 80% to more than 90% (p<.0001). No carryover effects were observed. Discussion: ABQ can be improved significantly by intervention bundles with apparent sustainable effects.
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.