| Title |
Strategies to enhance rational use of antibiotics in hospital: a guideline by the German Society for Infectious Diseases
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Infection, April 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s15010-016-0885-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
K. de With, F. Allerberger, S. Amann, P. Apfalter, H.-R. Brodt, T. Eckmanns, M. Fellhauer, H. K. Geiss, O. Janata, R. Krause, S. Lemmen, E. Meyer, H. Mittermayer, U. Porsche, E. Presterl, S. Reuter, B. Sinha, R. Strauß, A. Wechsler-Fördös, C. Wenisch, W. V. Kern |
| Abstract |
In the time of increasing resistance and paucity of new drug development there is a growing need for strategies to enhance rational use of antibiotics in German and Austrian hospitals. An evidence-based guideline on recommendations for implementation of antibiotic stewardship (ABS) programmes was developed by the German Society for Infectious Diseases in association with the following societies, associations and institutions: German Society of Hospital Pharmacists, German Society for Hygiene and Microbiology, Paul Ehrlich Society for Chemotherapy, The Austrian Association of Hospital Pharmacists, Austrian Society for Infectious Diseases and Tropical Medicine, Austrian Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy, Robert Koch Institute. A structured literature research was performed in the databases EMBASE, BIOSIS, MEDLINE and The Cochrane Library from January 2006 to November 2010 with an update to April 2012 (MEDLINE and The Cochrane Library). The grading of recommendations in relation to their evidence is according to the AWMF Guidance Manual and Rules for Guideline Development. The guideline provides the grounds for rational use of antibiotics in hospital to counteract antimicrobial resistance and to improve the quality of care of patients with infections by maximising clinical outcomes while minimising toxicity. Requirements for a successful implementation of ABS programmes as well as core and supplemental ABS strategies are outlined. The German version of the guideline was published by the German Association of the Scientific Medical Societies (AWMF) in December 2013. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 31 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Saudi Arabia | 3 | 10% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 6% |
| United States | 2 | 6% |
| South Africa | 2 | 6% |
| Spain | 2 | 6% |
| Ireland | 1 | 3% |
| Colombia | 1 | 3% |
| France | 1 | 3% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 15 | 48% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 20 | 65% |
| Scientists | 7 | 23% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 10% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 317 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 315 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 49 | 15% |
| Researcher | 35 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 30 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 30 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 27 | 9% |
| Other | 58 | 18% |
| Unknown | 88 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 82 | 26% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 47 | 15% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 19 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 13 | 4% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 12 | 4% |
| Other | 48 | 15% |
| Unknown | 96 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 31. 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 04 September 2023.
All research outputs
#1,308,811
of 25,728,855 outputs
Outputs from Infection
#64
of 1,617 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,963
of 317,201 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Infection
#1
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,728,855 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,617 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 317,201 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.