ArticleAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Variation in Antibiotic Prescription in High-Risk Febrile Neutropenia in Portuguese Hospitals.
Article in Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionFebrile neutropenia (FN) is a potentially severe entity, particularly in hemato-oncologic patients who have higher incidence of colonization with multidrug-resistant bacteria. Discrepancies among guidelines contribute to divergence in antimicrobial practices. Our objective was to assess the variation of practices in antimicrobial therapy in high-risk FN among Portuguese hematologists.
methodsWe conducted a cross-sectional study through the implementation of an online survey, open to all clinical hematologists in the country. To characterize practice patterns regarding critical elements in FN management, three clinical vignettes were designed to describe typical situations where narrow-spectrum empiric antibiotics (vignette 1), short-course therapy (vignette 2) and de-escalation (vignette 3) could be performed. The remaining questions characterized clinical experience, department size, and differentiation and decision-making process regarding FN antibiotic therapy.
resultsThe survey yielded 31 responses from 11 hospitals across four regions. All respondents opted for empiric narrow-spectrum antibiotics, 22.6% opted for short-course therapy (mostly senior specialists from larger settings) and 35.5% for de-escalation (mostly young specialists). Availability of an FN protocol seemed to favor both approaches. These findings should be complemented by qualitative assessments of barriers to best practices and should support the need for interventions to improve antibiotic use in febrile neutropenia.
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.