ArticleAntimicrobial resistance and infection control2026
Audit of the prescription of antimicrobials using the four moments of decision tool in a university hospital.
Article in Antimicrobial resistance and infection control, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAntimicrobial resistance is a growing global threat driven by inappropriate antimicrobial use. The Four Moments of Antibiotic Decision Making is a stewardship framework that promotes rational antibiotic use. This study applied this framework to audit antimicrobial prescribing, assess adherence, and measure antimicrobial use.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective, cross-sectional audit of patients who received systemic antimicrobials between October and November 2023. The four audited moments included: (1) indication, suspected site, and clinical evidence of infection; (2) antimicrobial selection and culture collection; (3) reassessment between days 3 and 5 based on clinical response and culture results; and (4) treatment duration. Antimicrobial consumption was measured using days of therapy (DOT), length of therapy (LOT) and the WHO AWaRe classification.
resultsA total of 228 patients (53.5% male; mean age 57 years) received 304 antimicrobial treatments, including 129 intensive care units (ICU) admissions. 75.0% were fully adherent to all Four Moments. Adherence rates across moments 1 to 4 were 97%, 88.8%, 89.3%, and 87.1%, respectively. In moment 2, cultures were indicated in 201 treatments but not requested in 15% of cases. Vancomycin was the most prolonged treatment, followed by ceftriaxone, piperacillin-tazobactam, and meropenem. Antimicrobial use was higher in ICUs, with DOT and LOT reaching 739 and 706 per 1,000 patient-days, respectively, compared with 496 and 319 in the wards. Most antimicrobial consumption corresponded to WHO AWaRe Watch antibiotics.
conclusionsAdherence to stewardship principles was high, although opportunities for improvement remain, particularly regarding culture collection and treatment duration optimization.
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.