Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Background: Extended-interval aminoglycoside (EIAG) and extended- and continuous-infusion β-lactam (EIBL and CIBL) dosing strategies are increasingly used in adults, but pediatric literature is limited.
Objective: The objective of this study was to describe the use of EIAG, EIBL, and CIBL dosing in pediatric hospitals in the USA.
Study Design, Setting, And Participants: A national survey of children's hospitals was conducted. A single practitioner from each target hospital was identified through the Children's Hospital Association. Practice-based survey questions identified whether hospitals utilize EIAG, EIBL, and CIBL dosing.
Main Outcome Measure: The main outcome measure was the percentage utilization of the dosing strategies, with secondary outcomes being the reasons for not using these dosing strategies.
Results: Seventy-seven of 215 identified practitioners (36 %) participated in the survey. EIAG, EIBL, and CIBL dosing were utilized in 63 %, 24 %, and 13 % of responding hospitals, respectively. The most common reasons for not using EIAG were concern regarding lack of efficacy data (56 %) and concern regarding the duration of the drug-free period (41 %). Respondents who did not utilize EIBL cited concern due to lack of pediatric EIBL efficacy data (54 %), the need for more intravenous access (54 %), intravenous medication compatibility issues (39 %), and the time during which the patient is attached to an intravenous infusion (31 %).
Conclusion: This survey of children's hospitals indicates that EIAG is used in over 50 % of hospitals, but there is some lag in adoption of EIBL and CIBL dosing, both of which are used in fewer than 25 % of hospitals. Additional studies may provide much-needed evidence to increase the utilization of these strategies.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40272-014-0093-1 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!