MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2753351869 · doi:10.1093/ofid/ofx163.805

Experience with High Dose Once-daily Vancomycin for Patients with Skin and Soft-tissue infections in an Ambulatory Setting

2017· article· en· W2753351869 on OpenAlexaff
Maggie Wong, Michael Chapman, Sangita Malhotra, Yazdan Mirzanejad, Gregory D. Deans

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Forum Infectious Diseases · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAntimicrobial Resistance in Staphylococcus
Canadian institutionsRoyal Columbian HospitalSurrey Memorial HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineVancomycinRegimenAmbulatoryAntibioticsObservational studyInternal medicineDemographicsMethicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureusStaphylococcus aureusSurgeryIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Intravenous (IV) vancomycin is commonly used to treat MRSA (methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus) infections and is typically dosed at 15 mg/kg every 12 hours. Pharmacokinetic studies, animal models, and limited human study suggest that once-daily high dose (30 mg/kg) vancomycin is similar in efficacy for certain types of infection in the hospital setting, but there is little evidence for its use in outpatient antibiotic therapy (OPAT). We have used a high dose vancomycin regimen for MRSA skin and soft-tissue infections (SSTI) since 2011. We describe our experience with this regimen in an ambulatory setting supervised by Infectious Diseases (ID) physicians and evaluate its efficacy and safety. Methods This retrospective observational study included patients treated with vancomycin for SSTI from Jan 1, 2014 to July 31, 2015. Exclusion criteria included noncompliance with treatment. Patients with initial renal impairment were also excluded as they would be given 15 mg/kg vancomycin daily. Patient demographics, response to vancomycin, duration of therapy, readmission to emergency department (ER), and side effects experienced by patients were collected. A successful outcome was defined as no further requirement for IV vancomycin on the last day of therapy with either oral step down therapy or no further antibiotic. Results 407 charts were reviewed and 208 patients qualified for inclusion. The mean age of included patients was 38 years. Of the 208 patients, 31% were people who inject drugs, 39% had preceding SSTI in the 12 months prior, and 48% had been on antibiotics in the previous 8 weeks. Incision and drainage was done in 50% of the patients. There were 135 positive wound cultures, of which 58% grew MRSA. The average duration of treatment was 4.7 days. A successful outcome was achieved in 162 patients (79%). Side effects including red man syndrome and phlebitis were seen in 19 patients (9.3%). 42 patients (20.5%) were readmitted to ER within 30 days of initial referral, and 18 of those were related to the original infections. Conclusion High dose (30 mg/kg) once-daily vancomycin for SSTI was effective and safe when used for select patients under the supervision of ID physicians in an ambulatory setting. Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Forum Infectious DiseasesSame topicAntimicrobial Resistance in StaphylococcusFrench-language works237,207