Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38817948›Full record

ArticleJAC-antimicrobial resistance2024

Clinical outcomes in OPAT patients treated with ceftriaxone 4 g and ceftazidime 6 g extended interval dosing regimens.

David Wareham, Mark Melzer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAC-antimicrobial resistance, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
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

2 authors.

David WarehamSenior Clinical Lecturer in Microbiology, Queen Mary University London, Mile End Rd., London E1 4NS, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4331-5224
Mark MelzerConsultant in Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, Whipps Cross University Hospitals, Whipps Cross Rd., London E11 1NR, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: New dosing regimens for ceftriaxone 4 g/24 hours and ceftazidime 3 g/12 hours are convenient for patients receiving OPAT. To date, these have not been clinically validated. Aim: To assess the tolerability, toxicity and effectiveness of once daily ceftriaxone (4 g) and 12 hourly ceftazidime regimens (3 g twice a day) in the OPAT setting. Patients and methods: From April 2018 until March 2023; demographic, clinical, microbiological and outcome data were collected on all adult patients discharged to a community-based OPAT team in East London. Results: There were 487 OPAT episodes. Fifty-three (10.9%) patients received ceftriaxone 4 g once a day and 20 (4.1%) ceftazidime 3 g twice a day. In the ceftriaxone group, the commonest conditions treated were orthopaedic, neurosurgical or diabetic foot infections. OPAT was used to expedite the discharge of 45 (84.9%) patients, the remainder were admission avoidance episodes. The commonest isolate causing infection was MSSA 23 (43.4%). There were no tolerability or toxicity episodes recorded. All patients were cured and bed days saved were 1266.In the smaller twice-daily ceftazidime cohort, seven (35%) patients were treated for necrotizing otitis externa, six (30%) for bronchiectasis and six (30%) for urinary tract infections. The commonest cause of infection was Conclusions: Regimens of ceftriaxone 4 g once a day and ceftazidime 3 g twice a day were well tolerated and highly effective. If widely adopted, these regimens will save OPAT and nursing time and enable more patients to be treated.

Identifiers

PMID38817948
PMCPMC11138961

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.