Evidence Hub

Mortality after broad‐ versus narrow‐spectrum antibiotic treatment for patients with nursing and healthcare‐associated pneumonia: A nationwide retrospective cohort study

Jumpei Taniguchi, S. Aso, H. Matsui, K. Fushimi, H. Yasunaga

Journal of Hospital Medicine, 2025

828,283 participants · 4 citations

Abstract

Abstract Background Nursing and healthcare‐associated pneumonia (NHCAP) is defined as pneumonia occurring in individuals with frequent healthcare contact, such as residents of care facilities or patients with impaired activities of daily living. The effectiveness of broad‐spectrum antibiotics in treating NHCAP remains unclear. Objective To compare clinical outcomes between broad‐ and narrow‐spectrum antibiotic treatments in patients with NHCAP using a nationwide inpatient database. Methods Patients diagnosed with NHCAP between April 2014 and March 2022 were identified from the Diagnosis Procedure Combination inpatient database in Japan. Patients were categorised into those receiving broad‐spectrum antibiotics (antipseudomonal penicillins, antipseudomonal cephalosporins, and carbapenems) and those receiving narrow‐spectrum antibiotics (third‐generation cephalosporins and penicillin plus β‐lactamase inhibitor combinations). Instrumental variable analysis using hospital preference for broad‐spectrum antibiotics was conducted to compare 30‐day in‐hospital mortality. A subgroup analysis was performed for patients with ≥3 risk factors for antibiotic‐resistant pathogens. Results Among 828,283 eligible patients, 24.8% received broad‐spectrum antibiotics, while 75.2% received narrow‐spectrum antibiotics. Instrumental variable analysis showed that broad‐spectrum antibiotic use was not associated with 30‐day in‐hospital mortality (10.0% vs. 10.0%; risk difference, 0.0%; 95% confidence…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 828,283 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free