Opportunities to enhance antibiotic stewardship: Colistin use and outcomes in a low-resource setting
JAC-Antimicrobial Resistance, ISSN: 2632-1823, Vol: 3, Issue: 4, Page: dlab169
2021
- 5Citations
- 20Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations5
- Citation Indexes5
- Captures20
- Readers20
- 20
Article Description
Background: Colistin use is increasing with the rise in MDR Gram-negative infections globally. Effective antibiotic stewardship is essential to preserve this antibiotic of last resort. Objectives: This study investigated stewardship and safety errors related to colistin use to identify opportunities for improvement. Patients and methods: A prospective descriptive study involving all patients 13 years and older treated with colistin at a tertiary hospital in Cape Town, South Africa, between August 2018 and June 2019. We collected clinical, laboratory and outcome data and assessed provided treatment for stewardship and safety errors. Results: We included 44 patients. Treatment errors were identified for 34 (77%) patients (median = 1), most commonly inadequate monitoring of renal function (N = 16, 32%). We also identified no rational indication for colistin (N = 9, 20%), loading dose error (N = 12, 27%); maintenance dose error (N = 10, 23%); no prior culture (N = 11, 25%); and failure to de-escalate (2 of 9) or adjust dose to changes in renal function (6 of 15). All cause in-hospital mortality was 47%. Amongst survivors, median ICU stay was 6 days and hospital stay more than 30 days. Eight (18%) patients developed renal injury or failure during treatment. Three (7%) patients in this study were found to have colistin-resistant organisms including two prior to colistin exposure. Conclusions: This study has identified opportunities to enhance colistin stewardship and improve efficacy and safety of prescription. The appearance of colistin-resistant organisms reinforces the urgent need to ensure effective and appropriate use of colistin.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85135942556&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jacamr/dlab169; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34806008; https://academic.oup.com/jacamr/article/doi/10.1093/jacamr/dlab169/6429830; https://academic.oup.com/jacamr/article-pdf/3/4/dlab169/41162108/dlab169.pdf; https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jacamr/dlab169; https://academic.oup.com/jacamr/article/3/4/dlab169/6429830
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know