Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38352150›Full record

Trial reportOpen forum infectious diseases2024

Outcomes of Ceftriaxone Compared With Cefazolin or Nafcillin/Oxacillin for Outpatient Therapy for Methicillin-Sensitive

Yasir Hamad, Katelin B Nickel, Margaret A Olsen, Ige A George

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Open forum infectious diseases, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Ceftriaxone for methicillin-susceptibleAnnals of medicine · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Management of seriousPaediatrics & child health · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. A bundle of the top 10 OPAT publications in 2024.Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE · 2026
    Review
  7. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Yasir HamadCritical Care Medicine Department, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6616-7127
Katelin B NickelDivision of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine in St Louis, St Louis, Missouri, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4116-512X
Margaret A OlsenDivision of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine in St Louis, St Louis, Missouri, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7070-9320
Ige A GeorgeDivision of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine in St Louis, St Louis, Missouri, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1425-4488
Washington University in St. Louis · USNational Institutes of Health Clinical Center · US

Funding

WU INSTITUTE OF CLINICAL AND TRANSLATIONAL SCIENCESUL1TR002345 · NCATS · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI William G. Powderly · 2017 to 2026
$97.8M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002345
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Ceftriaxone is a convenient option for methicillin-sensitive Methods: In this retrospective cohort, a large insurance claims database was queried from 2010 to 2018 for adults with MSSA bloodstream infection (BSI). Patients discharged on OPAT on cefazolin or oxacillin/nafcillin were compared with ceftriaxone with respect to 90-day hospital readmission with the same infection category and 90-day all-cause readmission using logistic regression models. Results: Of 1895 patients with MSSA BSI, 1435 (75.7%) patients received cefazolin, oxacillin, or nafcillin and 460 (24.3%) ceftriaxone. Readmission due to the same infection category occurred in 366 (19.3%), and all-cause readmission occurred in 535 (28.3%) within 90 days. Risk factors significantly associated with readmission with the same infection category were the oldest sampled age group (61-64 years: adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.47 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.01-2.14]), intensive care unit stay during index admission (aOR, 2.33 [95% CI, 1.81-3.01]), prosthetic joint infection (aOR, 1.96 [95% CI, 1.18-2.23]), central line-associated BSI (aOR, 1.72 [95% CI, 1.33-2.94]), and endocarditis (aOR, 1.63 [95% CI, 1.18-2.23]). Ceftriaxone was not associated with increased risk of readmission with the same infection category (aOR, 0.89 [95% CI, .67-1.18]), or 90-day all-cause readmission (aOR, 0.86 [95% CI, .66-1.10]) when compared with oxacillin/nafcillin/cefazolin. Conclusions: In this cohort of MSSA BSI patients discharged on OPAT, there were no differences in outcomes of readmission with the same infection and 90-day all-cause readmission in patients treated with ceftriaxone compared to oxacillin/nafcillin or cefazolin. Patients with complicated BSIs such as endocarditis and epidural abscess were more likely to be prescribed cefazolin or oxacillin/nafcillin.

Indexed as

bloodstream infectionceftriaxonemethicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureusMSSAoutpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy

Identifiers

PMID38352150
PMCPMC10863560
OpenAlexW4390829090

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.