Antibiotic Selection and Duration for Catheter-Associated Urinary Tract Infection in Non-Hospitalized Older Adults: A Population-Based Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: We sought to evaluate the impact of antibiotic selection and duration of therapy on treatment failure in older adults with catheter-associated urinary tract infection (CA-UTI). Methods: We conducted a population-based cohort study comparing antibiotic treatment options and duration of therapy for non-hospitalized adults aged 66 and older with presumed CA-UTI (defined as an antibiotic prescription and an organism identified in urine culture in a patient with urinary catheterization documented within the prior 90 d). The primary outcome was treatment failure, a composite of repeat urinary antibiotic prescribing, positive blood culture with the same organism, all-cause hospitalization or mortality, within 60 days. We determined the risk of treatment failure accounting for age, sex, comorbidities, and healthcare exposure using log-binomial regression. Results: Of 4,436 CA-UTI patients, 2,709 (61.1%) experienced treatment failure. Compared to a reference of TMP-SMX (61.9% failure), of those treated with fluoroquinolones, 56.3% experienced failure (RR 0.91, 95% CI: 0.85-0.98) and 60.9% of patients treated with nitrofurantoin experienced failure (RR 1.02, 95% CI: 0.94-1.10). Compared to 5-7 days of therapy (treatment failure: 59.4%), 1-4 days was associated with 69.5% failure (RR 1.15, 95% CI: 1.05-1.27), and 8-14 days was associated with a 62.0% failure (RR 1.05, 95% CI: 0.99-1.11). Conclusions: Although most treatment options for CA-UTI have a similar risk of treatment failure, fluoroquinolones, and treatment durations ≥ 5 days in duration appear to be associated with modestly improved clinical outcomes. From a duration of therapy perspective, this study provides reassurance that relatively short courses of 5-7 days may be reasonable for CA-UTI.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".