ArticlePloS one2026
Analysis of rational use and misuse of antibiotics in emergency departments: A cross-sectional study.
Article in PloS one, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess antibiotic prescribing frequency and the appropriateness of prescriptions based on established rational antibiotic use principles among adult patients evaluated in the emergency department.
methodsThis retrospective, cross-sectional study was conducted in the emergency department of a tertiary university hospital between 1 January and 30 June 2022. Adult patients (≥18 years) who received or were prescribed antibiotics were included. Demographic, clinical, and microbiological data were retrieved from the hospital information management system. Prescriptions were evaluated against rational antibiotic use criteria defined by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Turkish Medicines and Medical Devices Agency (TİTCK).
resultsA total of 595 patients were analyzed (62.4% female; mean age, 31.1 ± 14.2 years). Antibiotics were prescribed in 95.8% of encounters. Amoxicillin-clavulanic acid was the most commonly used agent (58.7%), followed by amoxicillin (8.7%) and metronidazole (5.6%). Microbiological culture sampling was conducted in only 0.8% of cases. Among patients who received antibiotic therapy (n = 570), 87.2% of prescriptions were classified as appropriate and 12.8% were classified as inappropriate according to guideline-based evaluation. In the overall cohort, 4.2% of patients did not receive antibiotic therapy. Most treated patients received a single antibiotic (95.8%), whereas dual antibiotic therapy was infrequently used (4.0%).
conclusionAntibiotic prescribing in the emergency department was notably high, accompanied by critically low rates of microbiological investigation. The findings demonstrate a persistent reliance on empirical therapy. Enhancing diagnostic support, promoting culture-guided treatment, and incorporating routine antimicrobial de-escalation strategies may help strengthen rational antibiotic use and warrant further evaluation.
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.