{rfName}
Id

Indexed in

License and use

Altmetrics

Analysis of institutional authors

Aracil Santos, F.j.AuthorDel Rosal Rabes, T.AuthorMellado Pena, Maria JoseAuthor

Share

April 6, 2019
Publications
>
Article
No

Identifying priorities to improve paediatric in-hospital antimicrobial use by cross-sectional evaluation of prevalence and appropriateness of prescription

Publicated to:ENFERMEDADES INFECCIOSAS Y MICROBIOLOGIA CLINICA. 35 (9): 556,562-562 - 2017-11-01 35(9), DOI: 10.1016/j.eimc.2017.01.011

Authors: Goycochea Valdivia, Walter Alfredo; Moreno Ramos, Francisco; Paño Pardo, José Ramón; Aracil Santos, FJ; Baquero Artigao, Fernando; del Rosal Rabes, Teresa; Mellado Peña, María José; Escosa García, Luis

Affiliations

Hosp Clin Univ Lozano Blesa IIS Aragon, Div Enfermedades Infecciosas, Zaragoza, Spain - Author
Hosp Univ La Paz, Dept Enfermedades Infecciosas Microbiol Clin, Madrid, Spain - Author
Hosp Univ La Paz, Dept Enfermedades Infecciosas Pediat, Madrid, Spain - Author
Hosp Univ La Paz, Dept Farm, Madrid, Spain - Author
Hosp Univ La Paz, Pediat Programa Optimizac Uso Antibioticos, Unidad Pediat Cuidados Intensivos, Madrid, Spain - Author
Hospital Clínico Universitario Lozano Blesa - Author
Hospital Universitario La Paz - Author
See more

Abstract

© 2017 Elsevier España, S.L.U. and Sociedad Española de Enfermedades Infecciosas y Microbiología Clínica Introduction Information about paediatric in-hospital antimicrobial usage and prescribing patterns to guide improvement strategies is scant. We aim to use an evaluation of the prevalence and appropriateness of antimicrobial prescription to identify antimicrobial stewardship priorities in children. Methods A cross-sectional point study was performed on hospitalised paediatric patients in a Spanish tertiary hospital, assessing the prevalence of antimicrobial prescription (PAP) and appropriateness of antimicrobial prescription (AAP). AAP was defined as a correct indication plus an appropriate prescribing pattern (dose, spectrum and interval). Evaluation was performed using established antimicrobial guidelines. Other factors that may have a bearing on antimicrobial prescription were also analysed. Results A total of 171 patients were included. PAP was 49.7% (85/171) and AAP was 60.9% (91/161). The most common indications for antimicrobial use were antimicrobial prophylaxis (28.3%, 32/113) and pneumonia (8.2%, 8/113). Overall, 161 antimicrobials were prescribed (1.9 antimicrobials per patient): 55.3% (89/161) were empiric, 16.1% (26/161) were targeted and 28.6% (46/161) were prophylactic. Amoxicillin/clavulanate (8.2%, 14/171) and sulfamethoxazole/trimethoprim (8.2%, 14/171) were the most prescribed antimicrobials. The prescription of antifungals (11.7%, 20/171) and antivirals (1.8%, 3/171) was analysed. Major causes of inappropriate antibiotic use were prolonged prescriptions (21.7%, 35/161) and use of agents with an excessively broad coverage spectrum (21.1%, 34/161). PAP and AAP varied between wards and antimicrobials. Conclusions Measurement of PAP and AAP offers valuable information for detecting priorities in hospital settings and monitoring antimicrobial usage prior to the development of antimicrobial stewardship programmes. In our setting, the main areas for improvement are duration of therapy and proper use of broad-spectrum antimicrobials.

Keywords

antibiotic prescriptionantibiotic usageantimicrobial managementhospitalmanejo de antimicrobianospaediatricspediatríaprescripción antibióticaAntibiotic prescriptionAntibiotic usageAntimicrobial managementHospitalPaediatricsUso de antibióticos

Quality index

Bibliometric impact. Analysis of the contribution and dissemination channel

The work has been published in the journal ENFERMEDADES INFECCIOSAS Y MICROBIOLOGIA CLINICA, and although the journal is classified in the quartile Q3 (Agencia WoS (JCR)), its regional focus and specialization in Microbiology, give it significant recognition in a specific niche of scientific knowledge at an international level.

From a relative perspective, and based on the normalized impact indicator calculated from World Citations from Scopus Elsevier, it yields a value for the Field-Weighted Citation Impact from the Scopus agency: 2.35, which indicates that, compared to works in the same discipline and in the same year of publication, it ranks as a work cited above average. (source consulted: ESI Nov 14, 2024)

This information is reinforced by other indicators of the same type, which, although dynamic over time and dependent on the set of average global citations at the time of their calculation, consistently position the work at some point among the top 50% most cited in its field:

  • Field Citation Ratio (FCR) from Dimensions: 2.53 (source consulted: Dimensions Jul 2025)

Specifically, and according to different indexing agencies, this work has accumulated citations as of 2025-07-18, the following number of citations:

  • WoS: 12
  • Scopus: 12

Impact and social visibility

From the perspective of influence or social adoption, and based on metrics associated with mentions and interactions provided by agencies specializing in calculating the so-called "Alternative or Social Metrics," we can highlight as of 2025-07-18:

  • The use of this contribution in bookmarks, code forks, additions to favorite lists for recurrent reading, as well as general views, indicates that someone is using the publication as a basis for their current work. This may be a notable indicator of future more formal and academic citations. This claim is supported by the result of the "Capture" indicator, which yields a total of: 48 (PlumX).