↓ Skip to main content

Appropriate initial antibiotic therapy in hospitalized patients with gram-negative infections: systematic review and meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
27 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
98 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
164 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
Appropriate initial antibiotic therapy in hospitalized patients with gram-negative infections: systematic review and meta-analysis
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12879-015-1123-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gowri Raman, Esther Avendano, Samantha Berger, Vandana Menon

Abstract

The rapid global spread of multi-resistant bacteria and loss of antibiotic effectiveness increases the risk of initial inappropriate antibiotic therapy (IAT) and poses a serious threat to patient safety. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies to summarize the effect of appropriate antibiotic therapy (AAT) or IAT against gram-negative bacterial infections in the hospital setting. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL databases were searched until May 2014 to identify English-language studies examining use of AAT or IAT in hospitalized patients with Gram-negative pathogens. Outcomes of interest included mortality, clinical cure, cost, and length of stay. Citations and eligible full-text articles were screened in duplicate. Random effect models meta-analysis was used. Fifty-seven studies in 60 publications were eligible. AAT was associated with lower risk of mortality (unadjusted summary odds ratio [OR] 0.38, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.30-0.47, 39 studies, 5809 patients) and treatment failure (OR 0.22, 95 % CI 0.14-0.35; 3 studies, 283 patients). Conversely, IAT increased risk of mortality (unadjusted summary OR 2.66, 95 % CI 2.12-3.35; 39 studies, 5809 patients). In meta-analyses of adjusted data, AAT was associated with lower risk of mortality (adjusted summary OR 0.43, 95 % CI 0.23-0.83; 6 studies, 1409 patients). Conversely, IAT increased risk of mortality (adjusted summary OR 3.30, 95 % CI 2.42-4.49; 16 studies, 2493 patients). A limited number of studies suggested higher cost and longer hospital stay with IAT. There was considerable heterogeneity in the definition of AAT or IAT, pathogens studied, and outcomes assessed. Using a large set of studies we found that IAT is associated with a number of serious consequences,including an increased risk of hospital mortality. Infections caused by drug-resistant, Gram-negative organisms represent a considerable financial burden to healthcare systems due to the increased costs associated with the resources required to manage the infection, particularly longer hospital stays. However, there were insufficient data that evaluated AAT for the outcome of costs among patients with nosocomialGram-negative infections. IAT in hospitalized patients with Gram-negative infections is associated with adverse outcomes. Technological advances for rapid diagnostics to facilitate AAT along with antimicrobial stewardship, surveillance, infection control, and prevention is needed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 27 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 164 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 163 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 21 13%
Student > Master 21 13%
Researcher 18 11%
Student > Bachelor 15 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 7%
Other 30 18%
Unknown 47 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 61 37%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 13 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 9 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 4%
Other 16 10%
Unknown 48 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 24 March 2017.
All research outputs
#2,263,293
of 25,196,456 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#641
of 8,492 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,441
of 280,477 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#11
of 172 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,196,456 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,492 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its peers.
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 280,477 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 172 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.