SynthesisThe Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy2026
Pharmacists in OPAT: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy, 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesOutpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) is defined as the administration of at least two doses of parenteral antimicrobials in an outpatient setting without an overnight hospital admission. OPAT has demonstrated positive patient outcomes whilst reducing bed pressures in hospital and exposure to healthcare-associated infections. International infection societies stress the importance of a core multi-disciplinary team to manage OPAT services. However, many services do not have a pharmacist as part of this core group, with few studies evaluating their effectiveness. To evaluate current evidence for the impact of pharmacists working in OPAT settings on patient safety and outcomes.
methodsA PRISMA protocol was developed and published (PROSPERO CRD42023452470). Database literature search completed from conception to April 2025. Studies were required to have a pharmacist as part of the multi-disciplinary team alongside a comparator cohort.
resultsWe identified 918 studies, with ten meeting the eligibility criteria and all demonstrating a high risk of bias. Pharmacist intervention was found to increase adherence to therapeutic drug monitoring and antibiotic dose adjustment by 40-64% and reduce antimicrobial prescribing errors by 17%-22%. Complications, including re-admissions; emergency department (ED) visits and unfavourable outcomes, had less consistent results across studies.
conclusionThe findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis indicate that the involvement of pharmacists was associated with improvements in process outcomes such as adherence to drug monitoring protocols, but associations with health outcomes were less consistent. Further studies with robust protocols are required.
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.