Point Prevalence Survey of Antimicrobial Utilization in the Cardiac and Pediatric Critical Care Unit
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To determine the rate of documented infections and prevalence of antimicrobial use among pediatric patients admitted to the PICU. To assess the appropriateness of antimicrobial prescribing according to clinical and microbiological findings, Infectious Disease Consult recommendations, and formulary guidelines. DESIGN: Prospective point prevalence study. SETTING: Cardiac and medical-surgical critical care units (CCCU-PICU) in a tertiary care pediatric teaching hospital in Toronto, Canada. PATIENTS: All patients admitted to the CCCU-PICU during the week of October 27, 2008 (period A) and February 9, 2009 (period B) were followed until completion of their antimicrobial course(s). Data were collected on infection types and indications, frequency, and types of antimicrobials used. Appropriateness of antimicrobial prescribing was assessed according to predefined criteria by four blinded clinician assessors. MEASUREMENT AND MAIN RESULTS: Forty-two of 60 patients (70%) received antimicrobials in period A and 42 of 53 patients (79%) received antimicrobials in period B. Of the patients on antimicrobials, 45% in period A and 52% in period B had a definitive diagnosis of infection. Pneumonia and sepsis were the most common infections in period A, whereas pneumonia and other respiratory tract infections were the most common in period B. Antimicrobials were commonly prescribed for documented infection (38%) during period A and empiric therapy (47%) during period B. Cefazolin, cefuroxime, vancomycin, and gentamicin were the commonly used antimicrobials during both periods. Inappropriate antimicrobial use ranged from 16.7% to 61.9%, depending on assessors and surveillance period. The most common reasons for inappropriate use were overly broad spectrum, wrong dosage, and unwarranted overlap of spectrum. CONCLUSIONS: There was a high prevalence of antimicrobial use in CCCU-PICU patients. Because a significant proportion of antimicrobial use was deemed inappropriate, interventions are required to optimize antimicrobial use in critically ill children.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".