Ceftriaxone use in the emergency department: are we doing it right?
- PMID: 12187130
- DOI: 10.1097/00006565-200208000-00007
Ceftriaxone use in the emergency department: are we doing it right?
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the patterns of ceftriaxone use in an urban pediatric emergency department (PED) and to determine if overuse exists based on published guidelines for management of febrile infants.
Methods: We conducted a retrospective study of 229 young febrile patients who received ceftriaxone between January 1 and March 31, 1995, in a large urban PED in a teaching hospital in Atlanta. Patients younger than 3 months, patients with chronic illnesses (eg, sickle cell anemia, HIV), and those who received ceftriaxone for sexually transmitted diseases were excluded.
Results: During the study period, ceftriaxone was administered 289 times to 229 patients (53% male) aged 3 months to 18 years. Sixty patients (26%) received ceftriaxone two or more times for the same illness. Data were stratified based on age, source of fever, temperature, leukocyte count, diagnosis of pneumonia, and visit order (initial or follow-up). At the time of their initial visit, 180 of 229 patients had an identifiable focus of infection (76 had pneumonia), but no source could be identified in the remaining 49. Based on temperature, leukocyte count, and the presence or absence of a focus, ceftriaxone use, as compared with practice guidelines, was justified in 40 of 229 (17.5%) patients, questionable in 43 of 229 (18.8%), and not justified in 146 of 229 (63.7%). For the 60 patients who received ceftriaxone more than once, its use was justified in only 13%. Results of blood cultures were positive in 3 of 229 (1.3%) patients. Ceftriaxone was justified according to published guidelines in two of these three patients, whereas one patient with pneumonia and pneumococcal bacteremia could have been treated with oral antibiotics. Overall, for the entire study population (289 encounters at initial and subsequent visit combined), ceftriaxone use was justified in 48 patients (16.6%), questionable in 49 patients (17%), and not justified in 192 patients (66.4%).
Conclusions: Based on published guidelines, ceftriaxone use in the PED was not justified in the majority of cases.
Similar articles
-
Association of clinical practice guidelines with emergency department management of febrile infants ≤56 days of age.J Hosp Med. 2015 Jun;10(6):358-65. doi: 10.1002/jhm.2329. Epub 2015 Feb 13. J Hosp Med. 2015. PMID: 25684689 Free PMC article.
-
Outpatient treatment of febrile infants 28 to 89 days of age with intramuscular administration of ceftriaxone.J Pediatr. 1992 Jan;120(1):22-7. doi: 10.1016/s0022-3476(05)80591-8. J Pediatr. 1992. PMID: 1731019
-
The need for a second dose of ceftriaxone in febrile infants age 4-8 weeks.WMJ. 2000 Apr;99(2):60-2. WMJ. 2000. PMID: 10843028
-
Ceftriaxone in febrile neutropenia.J Chemother. 2003 Jun;15(3):211-9. doi: 10.1179/joc.2003.15.3.211. J Chemother. 2003. PMID: 12868545 Review.
-
Sepsis workup in febrile infants 0-90 days of age with respiratory syncytial virus infection.Pediatr Emerg Care. 2003 Oct;19(5):314-9. doi: 10.1097/01.pec.0000092576.40174.28. Pediatr Emerg Care. 2003. PMID: 14578830 Review.
Cited by
-
Antibiotic availability and the prevalence of pediatric pneumonia during a physicians' strike.Can J Infect Dis Med Microbiol. 2007 May;18(3):189-92. doi: 10.1155/2007/138792. Can J Infect Dis Med Microbiol. 2007. PMID: 18923715 Free PMC article.
-
Antibiotics for treating community-acquired pneumonia in people with sickle cell disease.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Nov 14;11(11):CD005598. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005598.pub4. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016. PMID: 27841444 Free PMC article.
-
Adherence to guidelines and protocols in the prehospital and emergency care setting: a systematic review.Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2013 Feb 19;21:9. doi: 10.1186/1757-7241-21-9. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2013. PMID: 23422062 Free PMC article.
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
