Evidence Hub

Effect of appropriate empirical antimicrobial therapy on mortality of patients with Gram-negative bloodstream infections: a retrospective cohort study

Shanshan Xu, Zhi-Hui Song, Fu-Rong Han, Chao Zhang

BMC Infectious Diseases, 2023

205 participants · 18 citations

Abstract

Background Little evidence exists regarding the prevalence of pathogens in bloodstream infections (BSIs), the mortality risk, and the benefit of combination therapy over monotherapy. This study aims to describe patterns of empiric antimicrobial therapy, and the epidemiology of Gram-negative pathogens, and to investigate the effect of appropriate therapy and appropriate combination therapy on the mortality of patients with BSIs. Methods This was a retrospective cohort study including all patients with BSIs of Gram-negative pathogens from January 2017 to December 2022 in a Chinese general hospital. The in-hospital mortality was compared between appropriate and inappropriate therapy, and between monotherapy and combination therapy for patients receiving appropriate therapy. We used Cox regression analysis to identify factors independently associated with in-hospital mortality. Results We included 205 patients in the study, of whom 147 (71.71%) patients received appropriate therapy compared with 58 (28.29%) who received inappropriate therapy. The most common Gram-negative pathogen was Escherichia coli (37.56%). 131 (63.90%) patients received monotherapy and 74 (36.10%) patients received combination therapy. The in-hospital mortality was significantly lower in patients administered appropriate therapy than inappropriate therapy (16.33% vs. 48.28%, p = 0.004); adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.55 [95% CI 0.35–0.84], p = 0.006). In-hospital mortality was also not different in…

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: 205 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