Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Continuous versus intermittent piperacillin/tazobactam infusion in infection due to or suspected pseudomonas aeruginosa
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Continuous versus intermittent piperacillin/tazobactam infusion in infection due to or suspected pseudomonas aeruginosa
Do you wish to request the book?
Continuous versus intermittent piperacillin/tazobactam infusion in infection due to or suspected pseudomonas aeruginosa
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Continuous versus intermittent piperacillin/tazobactam infusion in infection due to or suspected pseudomonas aeruginosa
2016
Overview
Background
There is lack of information on the efficacy and safety of piperacillin–tazobactam administered by continuous infusion.
Objective
The aim of this study was to investigate whether continuous infusion of piperacillin–tazobactam is superior in terms of efficacy to a 30 % higher dose administered by intermittent infusion to treat suspected or confirmed infection due to
Pseudomonas aeruginosa
.
Setting
Multicenter clinical trial with 11 third level Spanish hospitals.
Method
Randomized, double-blind parallel-group clinical trial, controlled by conventional administration of the drug. Patients randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive piperacillin–tazobactam as continuous infusion (CI) or intermittent (II).
Main outcome measure
Primary efficacy endpoint was percentage of patients having a satisfactory clinical response at completion of treatment, defined as clinical cure or clinical improvement. Adverse events were reported.
Results
78 patients were included, 40 in the CI group and 38 in the II group. Mean (standard deviation) duration of treatment was 7 (±4.44) days. 58 patients (74.4 %) experienced cure or improvement at the end of the treatment. There were no statistical differences in cure rates between the two treatment arms and no adverse events were reported.
Conclusion
Continuous infusion of piperacillin–tazobactam is an alternative administration drug method at least similar in efficacy and safety to conventional intermittent infusion. Multivariate analysis is needed to determine whether continuous administration might be more beneficial than intermittent in certain patient subgroups.
Publisher
Springer International Publishing,Springer Nature B.V
Subject
/ Aged
/ Anti-Bacterial Agents - administration & dosage
/ Anti-Bacterial Agents - adverse effects
/ Cross Infection - drug therapy
/ Cross Infection - microbiology
/ Drug Administration Schedule
/ Female
/ Humans
/ Male
/ Medicine
/ Penicillanic Acid - administration & dosage
/ Penicillanic Acid - adverse effects
/ Penicillanic Acid - analogs & derivatives
/ Pharmacy
/ Piperacillin - administration & dosage
/ Piperacillin - adverse effects
/ Pseudomonas aeruginosa - drug effects
/ Pseudomonas aeruginosa - growth & development
/ Pseudomonas aeruginosa - isolation & purification
/ Pseudomonas Infections - diagnosis
/ Pseudomonas Infections - drug therapy
/ Pseudomonas Infections - microbiology
/ Spain
