MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220778175 · doi:10.1093/jbcr/irac012.254

700 Use of Antibiograms and Changes in Bacterial Resistance Patterns

2022· article· en· W4220778175 on OpenAlexaffabout
Josephine A. D’Abbondanza, Natalia Ziolkowski, Sarah Rehou, Shahriar Shahrokhi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Burn Care & Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBurn Injury Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePiperacillinMeropenemAntibioticsTazobactamEmpiric therapyAntibiotic resistanceVancomycinPiperacillin/tazobactamInternal medicineIncidence (geometry)Intensive care medicineEmpiric treatmentMicrobiologyPseudomonas aeruginosaImipenemStaphylococcus aureusBacteriaBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction Infection is a leading cause of death in burn patients. With an increase in resistance patterns, management of these infections has become progressively difficult. Antibiograms, a summary of susceptibilities to bacteria in a given institution or area, are often used to guide empiric treatment of infections. However, inappropriate prescribing and use of empiric antimicrobials may greatly impact the incidence of resistance. Currently, we do not know the patterns of antibiotic use since the introduction of institutional antibiograms or associated changes in antibiotic resistance. The objective of this study is to describe trends in antibiotic susceptibilities in burn patients in Canada pre- (PrA) and post-introduction (PoA) of antibiograms. Methods We performed a retrospective review of patients admitted to an ABA-verified Burn Centre 2 years pre- (2013-2014) and post-introduction (2016-2017) of institutional antibiograms and started on broad-spectrum antibiotics (meropenem, piperacillin-tazobactam, and/or vancomycin). Results A total of 864 patients were admitted during the study period (n=420 PrA and n=444 PoA). Average age, % total body surface area (%TBSA), and length of stay were similar between cohorts. Administration of empiric meropenem increased (43.2% vs. 56.8%) and piperacillin-tazobactam decreased (60.6% vs. 39.4%), which was significant (p=0.002). The use of vancomycin was unchanged. There was a significant decrease in the overall use of empiric antibiotics (p=0.002) since the inception of antibiograms, with a significant improvement in culture and sensitivity (C&S) testing within 5 days of starting empiric antibiotics (p=0.002). There was no significant difference in use of targeted antibiotics pre- or post-antibiogram introduction. Conclusions Our study demonstrates that since the inception of antibiograms, there has been a significant decrease in overall use of empiric antibiotics and improvement in acquiring C&S within 5 days. However, these antibiotics were not always targeted to the appropriate organism and therefore may contribute to multi-drug resistant organisms in a burn population.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.184
Threshold uncertainty score0.327

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.287 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Burn Care & ResearchSame topicBurn Injury Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207