↓ Skip to main content

Survey of pharmacists’ antibiotic dosing recommendations for sustained low-efficiency dialysis

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
62 Mendeley
Title
Survey of pharmacists’ antibiotic dosing recommendations for sustained low-efficiency dialysis
Published in
International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy, October 2015
DOI 10.1007/s11096-015-0214-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jian P. Mei, Azadeh Ali-Moghaddam, Bruce A. Mueller

Abstract

Background The use of hybrid renal replacement therapies like sustained low efficiency dialysis (SLED) is increasing in ICUs worldwide. However, pharmacokinetic studies designed to inform therapeutic antibiotic dosing in critically ill patients receiving SLED are limited. SLED operational characteristics vary across institutions. Pharmacists in institutions that utilize SLED are challenged to recommend therapeutic doses for antibiotics. Objective To characterize pharmacist-recommended antibiotic regimens for SLED. Methods An electronic survey was sent to pharmacist members of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy in the Nephrology or Critical Care Practice and Research Network. Dosing recommendations for a hypothetical critically ill septic patient were collected for cefepime, ceftaroline, daptomycin, levofloxacin, meropenem, and piperacillin/tazobactam. Main outcome measure Antibiotic regimens for the six antibiotics, their frequency, pharmacist's experience with renal replacement therapies (RRT), post-graduate training, years of clinical experience, number of staffed beds in their hospital, and RRT employed in their ICUs. Results The survey was completed by 69 clinical pharmacists who had 8.5 ± 7.5 (mean ± SD) years of experience. All pharmacists had experience dosing medications for patients receiving RRT. The most frequently recommended regimen for each antibiotic was: cefepime 1000 mg every 24 h, ceftaroline 200 mg every 12 h, daptomycin 6 mg/kg every 24 h, levofloxacin 500 mg every 24 h, meropenem 1000 mg every 12 h, and piperacillin/tazobactam 2250 mg every 8 h. Up to nine distinct regimens were recommended for each antibiotic, and the total daily dose between these regimens ranged by as much as a 12-fold. Neither pharmacist's experience with SLED, post-graduate training, nor years of clinical experience were significantly associated with particular dosing recommendations for the antibiotics. Conclusion Pharmacists working in institutions that utilize SLED make antibiotic dosing recommendations that vary 4-12-fold depending on the drug. Published research does not provide adequate guidance to optimally dose antibiotics in patients receiving SLED. More SLED pharmacokinetic trials, real-time serum concentration monitoring and advanced pharmacokinetic modeling techniques are necessary to ensure therapeutic dosing in patients receiving SLED.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 2%
Unknown 61 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 16%
Student > Master 8 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 10%
Student > Postgraduate 6 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Other 14 23%
Unknown 14 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 32%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 15 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 6%
Chemical Engineering 1 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 16 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 13 April 2018.
All research outputs
#14,091,602
of 23,023,224 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy
#711
of 1,103 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#142,912
of 284,327 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy
#13
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,023,224 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,103 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 284,327 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.