ArticleJournal of the Association of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Disease Canada = Journal officiel de l'Association pour la microbiologie medicale et l'infectiologie Canada2023
Establishing obstetrics-specific metrics and interventions for antimicrobial stewardship.
Article in Journal of the Association of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Disease Canada = Journal officiel de l'Association pour la microbiologie medicale et l'infectiologie Canada, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Placental Pathogens Associated With Adverse Maternal and Neonatal Outcomes.Open forum infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Bacterial pathogen spectrum and antimicrobial resistance in positive pus cultures from hospitalized patients at a maternal and child healthcare specialty hospital in Shenzhen, China, 2021-2025.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026Article
- Antepartum vs postpartum amoxicillin oral challenge in pregnant patients with a reported penicillin allergy: A two-center prospective cohort study.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: To describe baseline antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) metrics and apply AMS interventions in an inpatient obstetrical population. Methods: From October 2018 to October 2019, our tertiary-care obstetrical center reviewed components of our AMS program, which included: (1) antimicrobial consumption data, (2) point prevalence surveys (PPS), and (3) prospective audit and feedback. We reviewed institutional data for antimicrobial consumption from the pharmacy database. Detailed point prevalence surveys were conducted for all antimicrobial prescriptions on two predefined dates each month. Daily audits and feedback assessed the appropriateness of all non-protocolized antimicrobials. Results: Our average antimicrobial length of therapy (LOT) was 12 days per 100 patient-days, where erythromycin (2.33), amoxicillin (2.28), and ampicillin (1.81) were the greatest contributors. Point prevalence surveys revealed that 28.8% of obstetrical inpatients were on antimicrobials, of which 11.2% were inappropriate. Protocolized antimicrobials were 62% less likely ( Conclusions: Antimicrobial use in obstetrics is unique compared to general inpatients. We provide a baseline set of metrics for AMS at our obstetrical center intending to lay the groundwork for AMS programming in our discipline. Antimicrobial protocolization, as well as audit and feedback, are feasible interventions to improve antimicrobial prescribing patterns.
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.