↓ Skip to main content

Interventions Targeting the Prescribing and Monitoring of Vancomycin for Hospitalized Patients: A Systematic Review Protocol

Overview of attention for article published in Infectious Diseases and Therapy, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
39 Mendeley
Title
Interventions Targeting the Prescribing and Monitoring of Vancomycin for Hospitalized Patients: A Systematic Review Protocol
Published in
Infectious Diseases and Therapy, October 2017
DOI 10.1007/s40121-017-0177-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Cameron J. Phillips, Alice J. Wisdom, Ross A. McKinnon, Richard J. Woodman, David L. Gordon

Abstract

Vancomycin remains one of our essential antibiotics after fifty years of treating serious infections such as methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Vancomycin, unlike many other antibiotic agents, requires individualized dosing and monitoring of serum drug levels to ensure it is efficacious, to minimize toxicity, and to limit the development of antibiotic resistance. These issues have led to numerous vancomycin clinical practice guidelines being published in recent years including several key national guidelines. Significant resources are invested during the development of such guidelines; however, there is often little or no information about how such guidelines or other vancomycin practice improvement initiatives should be implemented. The aim of this systematic review is to identify and evaluate the effect of interventions using education, guideline implementation, and dissemination of educational resources that have sought to improve therapeutic drug monitoring and dosing of vancomycin. A systematic review of the literature will be conducted for RCTs and observational studies where a vancomycin guideline or practice improvement initiative has been implemented. Electronic databases to be searched are PubMed, Medline, CINAHL, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library of Systematic Reviews. The population will be patients who have had intravenous vancomycin prescribed and monitored in hospital. The interventions will be education, implementation of guidelines or protocols, dissemination of educational materials (printed or electronic) or multifaceted interventions of the above. The comparator will be patients who have had standard-care prescribing and monitoring of vancomycin. Outcomes will be changes in prescribing and ordering of vancomycin serum tests, and serum levels attained in patients as well as reported nephrotoxicity. Two reviewers will be involved in the quality assessment and extraction of data. The Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network checklist for RCTs will be used. Studies that are not randomized will be assessed for quality using the validated ROBINS-I (risk of bias in non-randomized studies of interventions) tool. This systematic review will identify interventions that have been used to implement guidelines and clinical practice initiatives for vancomycin. The findings of this review may be informative to those involved with the implementation of vancomycin clinical practice guidelines. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO: CRD42016049147.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 39 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 23%
Researcher 5 13%
Student > Postgraduate 3 8%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Other 2 5%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 15 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 15%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 8%
Social Sciences 3 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Other 6 15%
Unknown 15 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 10 May 2018.
All research outputs
#15,482,347
of 23,007,053 outputs
Outputs from Infectious Diseases and Therapy
#440
of 699 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#205,618
of 328,360 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Infectious Diseases and Therapy
#8
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,007,053 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 699 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.2. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 328,360 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.