Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 637

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Inappropriate initial antimicrobial therapy and its effect on survival in a clinical trial of immunomodulating therapy for severe sepsis

Open access
Harbarth, Stephan, Garbino, Jorge, Pugin, Jérome, Romand, Jacques A, Lew, Daniel, Pittet, Didier·2003·The American Journal of Medicine

Abstract

PURPOSE To examine the effect of inappropriate initial antimicrobial therapy on the prognosis of patients with sepsis who were enrolled in a clinical trial of an immunomodulating agent conducted in 108 hospitals in North America and Europe. METHODS We assessed initial antimicrobial choice and results of microbiologic cultures in 904 patients who had microbiologically confirmed severe sepsis or early septic shock. If a patient did not receive at least one antimicrobial agent to which the causative microorganisms were susceptible within 24 hours from the diagnosis of severe sepsis, then the initial antimicrobial treatment was considered to be inappropriate. A propensity score that adjusted for factors associated with inappropriate antimicrobial treatment was calculated and included in multivariable models to adjust for confounding. RESULTS A total of 468 patients (52%) had documented bloodstream infection, and 211 patients (23%) received inappropriate initial antimicrobial therapy. Characteristics associated with inappropriate treatment were study enrollment in Europe, admission to surgery, nosocomial infection, infection with multiresistant microorganisms, and fungal or polymicrobial infection (all P <0.05). The 28-day mortality was 24% (168/693) for patients in the adequately treated group versus 39% (82/211) for patients receiving inappropriate initial antimicrobial therapy (P <0.001). After adjusting for comorbid conditions, severity of illness, site of infection, and the propensity score, inappropriate antimicrobial therapy was independently associated with increased mortality (odds ratio = 1.8; 95% confidence interval: 1.2 to 2.6). CONCLUSION In a large cohort of patients with microbiologically confirmed severe sepsis, appropriate initial antimicrobial therapy was an important determinant of survival. New approaches aimed at improving detection and treatment of early sepsis are needed.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.amjmed.2003.07.005

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 637

Metadata

Authors
Harbarth, S., Garbino, J., Pugin, J., Romand, J. A., Lew, D., & Pittet, D.
Venue
The American Journal of Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2003-11
Volume
115
Issue
7
Pages
529-535
ISSN
0002-9343 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2062328478
Cited by
637
References
2
FWCI
20.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Inappropriate initial antimicrobial therapy and its effect on survival in a clinical trial of immunomodulating therapy for severe sepsis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.amjmed.2003.07.005
The paper
Harbarth, S., Garbino, J., Pugin, J., Romand, J. A., Lew, D., & Pittet, D. (2003). Inappropriate initial antimicrobial therapy and its effect on survival in a clinical trial of immunomodulating therapy for severe sepsis. The American Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjmed.2003.07.005

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.