↓ Skip to main content

Monitoring adherence to guidelines of antibiotic use in pediatric pneumonia: the MAREA study

Overview of attention for article published in Italian Journal of Pediatrics, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
92 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Monitoring adherence to guidelines of antibiotic use in pediatric pneumonia: the MAREA study
Published in
Italian Journal of Pediatrics, December 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13052-017-0432-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Pasquale Di Pietro, Ornella Della Casa Alberighi, Michela Silvestri, Maria Angela Tosca, Anna Ruocco, Giorgio Conforti, Giovanni A. Rossi, Elio Castagnola, Maria Caterina Merlano, Simona Zappettini, Salvatore Renna, the Pediatric Ligurian Network MAREA network

Abstract

Children are the most vulnerable population exposed to the use of antibiotics often incorrectly prescribed for the treatment of infections really due to viruses rather than to bacteria. We designed the MAREA study which consisted of two different studies: i) a surveillance study to monitor the safety/efficacy of the antibiotics for the treatment of pneumonia (CAP), pharyngotonsillitis and acute otitis media in children younger than 14 yrs old, living in Liguria, North-West Italy and ii) a pre-/post-interventional study to evaluate the appropriateness of antibiotic prescription for the treatment these infections. In this paper, we show only results of the appropriateness study about the antibiotic prescription for the treatment of pneumonia. Patients included in this study met the following inclusion criteria: i) admission to the Emergency/Inpatient Dpt/outpatient clinic of primary care pediatricians for pneumonia requiring antibiotics, ii) informed written consent. The practice of prescribing antibiotics was evaluated before-and-after a 1 day-educational intervention on International/National recommendations. Global adherence to guidelines was fulfilled in 45%: main reason for discordance was duration (shorter than recommended). Macrolide monotherapy and cephalosporins were highly prescribed; ampicillin/amoxicillin use was limited. 61% of patients received >1 antibiotic; parenteral route was used in 33%. After intervention, i) in all CAP, cephalosporin prescription decreased (-23%) and the inappropriate macrolide prescriptions was halved and, ii) in not hospitalized CAP (notH-CAP), macrolides were prescribed less frequently (-25%) and global adherence to guidelines improved (+39%); and iii) in H-CAP antibiotic choice appropriateness increase. Prescribing practices were sufficiently appropriate but widespread preference for multidrug empirical regimens or macrolide in monotherapy deserve closer investigation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 92 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 92 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 17 18%
Student > Bachelor 11 12%
Researcher 8 9%
Unspecified 7 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 8%
Other 15 16%
Unknown 27 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 27 29%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 10 11%
Unspecified 7 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 2%
Other 10 11%
Unknown 31 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 January 2018.
All research outputs
#17,292,294
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Italian Journal of Pediatrics
#575
of 1,060 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#282,183
of 447,848 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Italian Journal of Pediatrics
#10
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,060 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 447,848 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.