OBJECTIVE To investigate the scale of antimicrobial prescribing without a corresponding visit, and to compare the attributes of patients who received antimicrobials with a corresponding visit with those who did not have a visit. DESIGN Retrospective cohort. METHODS We followed up 185,010 Medicare patients for 1 year after an acute myocardial infarction. For each antimicrobial prescribed, we determined whether the patient had an inpatient, outpatient, or provider claim in the 7 days prior to the antimicrobial prescription being filled. We compared the proportions of patient characteristics for those prescriptions associated with a visit and without a visit (ie, phantom prescriptions). We also compared the rates at which different antimicrobials were prescribed without a visit. RESULTS We found that of 356,545 antimicrobial prescriptions, 14.75% had no evidence of a visit in the week prior to the prescription being filled. A higher percentage of patients without a visit were identified as white (P<.001) and female (P<.001). Patients without a visit had a higher likelihood of survival and fewer additional cardiac events (acute myocardial infarction, cardiac arrest, stroke, all P<.001). Among the antimicrobials considered, amoxicillin, penicillin, and agents containing trimethoprim and methenamine were much more likely to be prescribed without a visit. In contrast, levofloxacin, metronidazole, moxifloxacin, vancomycin, and cefdinir were much less likely to be prescribed without a visit. CONCLUSIONS Among this cohort of patients with chronic conditions, phantom prescriptions of antimicrobials are relatively common and occurred more frequently among those patients who were relatively healthy. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2016;1-8.
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science
6
15%
Nursing and Health Professions
5
13%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine
2
5%
Mathematics
1
3%
Other
2
5%
Unknown
11
28%
Attention Score in Context
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 31 October 2018.
All research outputs
#9,499,566
of 34,601,305 outputs
Outputs from Infection control and hospital epidemiology (Online)
#3,035
of 6,211 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#120,078
of 459,718 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Infection control and hospital epidemiology (Online)
#23
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,601,305 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 6,211 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 459,718 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 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.
