ArticleAntimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE2025
Short versus long treatment duration for streptococcal bloodstream infection.
Article in Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE, 2025. 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.
- Top unanswered questions in antimicrobial management of necrotizing soft tissue infections.Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Emerging data surrounding the rise in antimicrobial resistance have prompted a shift towards shorter antibiotic durations. Studies show similar clinical outcomes comparing shorter antibiotic courses to longer ones for uncomplicated Gram-negative bloodstream infections (BSI). However, there is a lack of data to inform durations of therapy for Streptococcal BSI. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of patients admitted to University of Utah Health with uncomplicated Streptococcal BSI. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to estimate the average treatment effects (ATE) of antibiotics administered for 10 days or fewer (short duration) versus more than 10 days (long duration). The primary outcome was a composite of recurrent BSI, all-cause mortality, and readmissions at 30 days from end of therapy. Results: Five hundred patients were screened and 196 were included in the final analysis. The most common sources were skin and soft tissue infections. The median duration in the short and long groups were 8 (IQR, 7-10) and 15 days (IQR, 14-17), respectively. The ATE of short versus long duration of antibiotics was not significant for the composite primary outcome (18% vs 18%; OR = 1.42 [95% CI: 0.57 to 3.53]). Conclusions: We found no appreciable difference in outcomes between patients treated with short versus long antibiotic durations for uncomplicated Streptococcal BSI. Given low absolute rates of mortality and recurrent BSI, along with the lack of evidence indicating a significant difference related to treatment duration, it is reasonable to consider shorter durations. Future research is needed to confirm our findings.
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.