Retrospective assessment of perioperative antimicrobial use for elective arthroscopy in horses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe perioperative antimicrobial use in horses undergoing elective arthroscopy. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective study. SAMPLE POPULATION: Horses that underwent elective arthroscopy at one institution between July 2016 and May 2018, excluding those with a suspected infectious orthopedic disease or with a comorbidity that may have impacted prophylactic antimicrobial use decisions. METHODS: test was used for categorical comparisons, and least squares fit was used to evaluate factors associated with duration of postoperative antimicrobials. RESULTS: Among 150 horses, 149 (99.3%) received systemic preoperative antimicrobials. Only 53 (40.2%) horses were administered doses within 60 minutes of surgical incision. First incision was performed more than two half-lives after administration of sodium penicillin in 46 of 131 (35.1%) horses but in only 1 of 106 (0.8%) horses that received trimethoprim-sulfadoxine. Body weight was associated with underdosing for penicillin (P = .0075) and trimethoprim-sulfadoxine (P = .002) but not gentamicin (P = .92). Twenty-six (17%) horses received one postoperative antimicrobial dose, while antimicrobials were continued in hospital for a mean of 22.3 ± 4.4 hours after surgery in the other 123 horses. Among the 149 discharged horses, 115 (77.2%) were prescribed antimicrobials after discharge (range, 3-10 days; median, 3 days, interquartile range, 0 days). CONCLUSION: Deviations from common recommendations were apparent and provide evidence for the requirement to develop interventions to optimize perioperative prophylaxis. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Perioperative antimicrobial use practices should be regularly assessed to provide a benchmark and identify areas for intervention.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".