ArticleScientific reports2025
Determinants of empiric combination antibiotic therapy for hospital associated bloodstream infections in the intensive care unit.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Empiric combination antibiotic therapy (ECAT) is commonly used to treat healthcare-associated bloodstream infections (HA-BSIs) and sepsis. However, the level of supporting evidence is low and clinical practice varies significantly. We conducted a post hoc analysis using the EUROBACT-2 international cohort study database, which contained data on 2406 adult patients from 328 intensive care units (ICUs) across 52 countries, collected between June 2019 and January 2021. The main outcome was the proportion of patients receiving ECAT for HA-BSIs. Patient and institutional factors influencing the use of ECAT were examined using Markov-Chain Monte Carlo estimation. Three quarters of patients (75.2%; n = 1810) received empiric antibiotic therapy, with ECAT used in approximately half of cases (52.5%; n = 950). Most patients receiving ECAT (70.4%; n = 669) were treated with two antibiotics, beta-lactams plus glycopeptides being the most common combination (40.2%; n = 382). The odds of ECAT were increased by immune deficiency (OR 1.35 [95% CrI 1.03-1.75]), SOFA scores > 11 (OR 1.77 [95% CrI 1.28-2.46]), uncommon sources of infection (OR 1.63 [95% CrI 1.02-2.59]), and admission to ICUs where > 25% of Enterobacteriaceae isolates produce carbapenemases (OR 2.46 [95% CrI 1.37-4.41). The intra-class correlation coefficients at the ICU and country levels were 23.2% and 4.4%, respectively. In conclusion, factors at the individual, institutional, and national levels may affect the use of ECAT to treat HA-BSIs. Given the impact of institutional variables on the use of ECAT and the inconclusive evidence regarding its potential risks, it is of great importance that treatment is tailored based on local antibiotic stewardship programs and the needs of the individual patient.
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.