↓ Skip to main content

Targeted de-escalation rounds may effectively and safely reduce meropenem use

Overview of attention for article published in Irish Journal of Medical Science, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
18 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Targeted de-escalation rounds may effectively and safely reduce meropenem use
Published in
Irish Journal of Medical Science, September 2016
DOI 10.1007/s11845-016-1504-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

U. Ni Riain, M. Tierney, C. Doyle, A. Vellinga, C. Fleming, M. Cormican

Abstract

Use of meropenem in our hospital has doubled in recent years. An audit in 2013 showed that although initiation of therapy with meropenem was generally appropriate, therapy was rarely subsequently reviewed and de-escalated where appropriate. Therefore, a structured stewardship initiative focussed on meropenem de-escalation was developed. A local guideline for review and de-escalation of meropenem was developed and approved by the Antimicrobial Stewardship Team. The guideline outlined clinical and microbiological criteria which when met should lead to recommendation for meropenem de-escalation. Implementation of the guideline was piloted for a period of 4 weeks by a consultant microbiologist and an antimicrobial pharmacist. Days of meropenem use and crude mortality in those in whom de-escalation was implemented were compared with those where de-escalation was not recommended or was recommended but not implemented. Thirty-three patients were reviewed. Overall, a recommendation to de-escalate from meropenem to a specified alternative antibiotic was made for 18 (55 %) patients. This advice was followed for 12 (36 %) patients. The median days of meropenem use in patients where meropenem was de-escalated was 4.5 days (range 2-19) compared with 14 days (range 6-84) where de-escalation was not recommended or the recommendation was not implemented. There was no statistically significant difference in crude mortality between patients de-escalated from meropenem and those where meropenem was continued. This pilot study suggests that targeted carbapenem de-escalation stewardship activity based on pre-determined criteria, while labour intensive, can effectively and safely reduce meropenem use in the acute hospital setting.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 18 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 22%
Other 2 11%
Student > Bachelor 1 6%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 6%
Other 3 17%
Unknown 6 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 33%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 11%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 6%
Arts and Humanities 1 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 6 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 November 2016.
All research outputs
#7,029,372
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Irish Journal of Medical Science
#332
of 1,537 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#99,848
of 330,419 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Irish Journal of Medical Science
#3
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,537 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 330,419 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.