ArticleAntimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE2024
Appropriateness of Empiric Initiation of Meropenem in the Intensive Care Unit as Determined by Internal Medicine Residents.
Article in Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE, 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.
- Seventeen Years of an Antibiotic Stewardship Programme: Trends in Antibiotic Prescribing and Gram-Negative Bacilli Susceptibility at a Quaternary Healthcare Institution.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
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
Objective: To evaluate the appropriateness of empiric initiation of meropenem in the intensive care unit (ICU) and to determine the agreement between internal medicine (IM) residents and infectious diseases (ID) physicians/pharmacists on appropriateness. Design: Retrospective observational study. Setting: ICU in a tertiary care community teaching hospital. Participants: Adult patients admitted to the ICU and started empirically on meropenem between April 1 and October 31, 2021. Methods: Meropenem usage was categorized as appropriate or inappropriate according to criteria developed from previously published indications and modified by ID physicians/pharmacists to reflect local practices. Two investigators (an IM resident and either an ID physician or pharmacist) assessed the appropriateness, with a second ID physician resolving any disagreements. Inter-rater reliability was measured using the kappa statistic. Results: Ninety-seven participants were enrolled, with a mean age of 68 (SD, 17.0) years. Pneumonia was the most common infection (30.9%). Among the participants, 92.8% received an ID consultation, with 55.6% of these occurring before meropenem initiation. IM residents deemed 56.7% of meropenem administrations appropriate, whereas an ID physician/pharmacist deemed only 48.5% appropriate, agreeing on 79.4% of cases (kappa statistic 0.59, Conclusions: Approximately half of empiric meropenem started in the ICU was deemed inappropriate using institution-specific criteria. There was good agreement between IM residents and ID physicians/pharmacists on meropenem appropriateness. IM residents could contribute to antimicrobial stewardship efforts, like prospective audit and feedback, using standardized criteria for appropriateness.
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.