Implementation and evaluation of a complex outpatient oral antimicrobial therapy program (COpAT) in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: We describe the implementation, outcomes, and challenges of a complex outpatient oral antimicrobial therapy program (COpAT) in Canada to provide a framework for those interested in establishing such a program. Setting: Outpatient ambulatory clinic led by infectious diseases physicians, serving patients from a tertiary hospital and a small community hospital. Design: Retrospective observational study that evaluated the efficacy, safety, and cost savings of patients enrolled in the program from August 2023 to June 2024. Results: One hundred three patients were included, of which 84.4% achieved successful clinical outcomes. Mean age of the patients was 62 years and 30% had diabetes. The top three sources of infections were bone and joint, intra-abdominal, and skin-and-soft tissue. Mean duration of COpAT was 37 days. Seventy-five percent of patients required only a single agent, and amoxicillin/clavulanic acid was most commonly used. Twenty-two patients developed an adverse reaction, of which three required a change in therapy and one resolved with antibiotic dose reduction. No C. difficile infections or mortality were reported 30-days post COpAT discharge. Twelve patients were re-admitted to the hospital; 50% of the cases were unrelated to infections. Compared to outpatient intravenous therapy, the total cost savings from COpAT were estimated to be $255,000 Canadian dollars (CAD), which translated to an average cost savings of $2500 CAD per patient per year. Conclusion: We demonstrated favorable clinical and safety outcomes with our COpAT program and substantial cost savings using existing infrastructure. COpAT allows efficient use of healthcare resources including decongestion of hospitals.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".