Observational studyPloS one2023
A sepsis treatment algorithm to improve early antibiotic de-escalation while maintaining adequacy of coverage (Early-IDEAS): A prospective observational study.
Observational study in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- eHealth and mHealth in Antimicrobial Stewardship to Reduce Mortality in Empirical Antimicrobial Therapy and a Systematic Review with a Meta-Analysis of Adequate Therapy.Infectious disease reports · 2024Review
- eHealth and mHealth in Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs.Digital biomarkersReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEmpiric antibiotic treatment selection should provide adequate coverage for potential pathogens while minimizing unnecessary broad-spectrum antibiotic use. We sought to pilot a sepsis treatment algorithm to individualize antibiotic recommendations, and thereby improve early antibiotic de-escalation while maintaining adequacy of coverage (Early-IDEAS).
methodsIn this observational study, the Early-IDEAS decision support algorithm was derived from previous Gram- negative and Gram-positive prediction rules and models along with local guidelines, and then applied to prospectively identified consecutive adults within 24 hours of suspected sepsis. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients for whom de-escalation of the primary antibiotic regimen was recommended by the algorithm. Secondary outcomes included: (1) proportion of patients for whom escalation was recommended; (2) number of recommended de-escalation steps along a pre-specified antibiotic cascade; and (3) adequacy of therapy in patients with culture-confirmed infection.
resultsWe screened 578 patients, of whom 107 eligible patients were included. The Early-IDEAS treatment recommendation was informed by Gram-negative models in 76 (71%) patients, Gram-positive rules in 64 (59.8%), and local guidelines in 27 (25.2%). Antibiotic de-escalation was recommended in almost half of all patients (n = 52, 48.6%), with a median of 2 steps down the a priori antibiotic treatment cascade. No treatment change was recommended in 45 patients (42.1%), and escalation was recommended in 10 (9.3%). Among the 17 patients with positive blood cultures, both the clinician prescribed regimen and the algorithm recommendation provided adequate coverage for the isolated pathogen in 12 patients (70.6%), (p = 1). Among the 25 patients with positive relevant, non-blood cultures, both the clinician prescribed regimen and the algorithm recommendation provided adequate coverage in 20 (80%), (p = 1).
conclusionAn individualized decision support algorithm in early sepsis could lead to substantial antibiotic de-escalation without compromising adequate antibiotic coverage.
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.