MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2551531753 · doi:10.14740/jocmr2637w

Hospital-Acquired Infections After Cardiac Surgery and Current Physician Practices: A Retrospective Cohort Study

2016· article· en· W2551531753 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Scott O’Keefe, Kenneth Williams, Jean‐François Légaré

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Medicine Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNosocomial Infections in ICU
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSepsisPneumoniaMortality rateCohortReferralRetrospective cohort studyEmergency medicineSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The management of hospital-acquired infections (HAIs) with respect to physician practices remains largely unexplored despite increasing efforts to standardize care. In the present study, we report findings from a 2-month audit of all patients that have undergone cardiac surgery at a large referral center in Atlantic Canada. Methods: All patients who underwent cardiac surgical procedures during May and June 2013 at the Queen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Center in Halifax, Nova Scotia were identified. The prevalence of urinary tract infections (UTIs), pneumonia, leg harvest site infections, superficial sternal wound infections, deep sternal wound infections, and sepsis was examined to determine physician approaches in terms of verification rates (microbiology), time of diagnosis and duration of treatment. Continuous variables were compared using Student’s t -test and categorical variables were analyzed using Fischer’s exact test. Results: A total of 185 consecutive patients underwent cardiac surgical procedures, of which 39 (21%) developed at least one postoperative infection. The overall prevalence of infection types, from highest to lowest, was UTI (8%), pneumonia (7%), leg harvest site infection (5%), superficial surgical site infection (4%), and sepsis (2%). There were no deep sternal wound infections. The overall in-hospital mortality rate was 3.8% with a median length of stay (LOS) of 8 days. The overall infection verification rate was 50% (ranged from 100% in sepsis to 10% in leg harvest site infections). In all cases, a full course of antibiotics was administered despite negative microbiology cultures or limited evidence of an actual infection. Conclusions: HAIs are commonly treated without being verified and treatment is often not discontinued after negative cultures are received. Our findings highlight the fact that antibiotic treatment is not always supported by evidence, and the effect of this could contribute to increased selective pressure for antimicrobial resistant bacteria. J Clin Med Res. 2017;9(1):10-16 doi: https://doi.org/10.14740/jocmr2637w

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.066
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.942

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.066
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.194
GPT teacher head0.555
Teacher spread0.361 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations27
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Medicine ResearchSame topicNosocomial Infections in ICUFrench-language works237,207