''Myth Busting in Infectious Diseases'': A Comprehensive Review
Abstract
Antibiotics have played a pivotal role in modern medicine, drastically reducing mortality rates associated with bacterial infections. Despite their significant contributions, the emergence of antibiotic resistance has become a formidable challenge, necessitating a re-evaluation of antibiotic use practices. The widespread belief in clinical practice that bactericidal antibiotics are inherently superior to bacteriostatic ones lacks consistent support from evidence in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). With the latest evidence, certain infections have demonstrated equal or even superior efficacy with bacteriostatic agents. Furthermore, within clinical practice, there is a tendency to indiscriminately order urine cultures for febrile patients, even in cases where alternative etiologies might be present. Consequently, upon obtaining a positive urine culture result, patients often receive antimicrobial prescriptions despite the absence of clinical indications warranting such treatment. Furthermore, it is a prevailing notion among physicians that extended durations of antibiotic therapy confer potential benefits and mitigate the emergence of antimicrobial resistance. Contrary to this belief, empirical evidence refutes such assertions. This article aims to address common myths and misconceptions within the field of infectious diseases.
Read the paper
Related studies
- Impact of antibiotics on the human microbiome and consequences for host health
- Antibiotics in the clinical pipeline in October 2019
- The incidence of collagen-associated adverse events in pediatric population with the use of fluoroquinolones: a nationwide cohort study in Taiwan
- Research Communications of the 32nd ECVIM-CA Online Congress
- Singlet-Oxygen Therapy. Scientific And Methodological Materials
- Artificial Intelligence in Pharmacovigilance
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.