Home Print this page Email this page Small font size Default font size Increase font size
Users Online: 759
Home About us Editorial board Search Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Contacts Login 
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2020  |  Volume : 9  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 50-55

Prospective study of irrational prescription of teicoplanin in a large academic hospital: A dilemma of antimicrobial resistance


1 Department of Clinical Pharmacy and Pharmacy Practice, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
2 Department of Infectious Diseases, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Shadi Farsaei
Department of Clinical Pharmacy and Pharmacy Practice, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan
Iran
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/jrpp.JRPP_19_104

Rights and Permissions

Objective: Teicoplanin is an antibiotic used to treat severe Gram-positive infections, especially those caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus(MRSA). In this study, we aimed to evaluate the pattern of teicoplanin rational prescribing to identify the factors which affected rational utilization. In addition, the teicoplanin minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) was assessed in randomly selected isolates. Methods: In this descriptive-analytical prospective study, a total of 256 patients were randomly selected to evaluate the pattern of teicoplanin use. The required data were gathered to assess the appropriateness of teicoplanin usage. Also, 100 teicoplanin Etests were used for measuring the MIC. Findings: The results showed that the appropriateness rate of teicoplanin usage was 21.9%. The mean MIC was 2.24 ± 5.47 mg/L for the MRSA cultures (33 cultures), including 32 sensitive cultures (97%). In addition, the mean MIC was 28.71 ± 8.29 mg/L for the vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) cultures (67 cultures), including five sensitive cultures (7.5%). Moreover, the analysis revealed that only the hospitalization ward was statistically significantly related to irrational usage (P = 0.014). Conclusion: The high prevalence of the inappropriate use of teicoplanin will lead to the development of antimicrobial resistance. Furthermore, the high rate of VRE cultures resistant to teicoplanin proves that teicoplanin has no advantage over vancomycin for treating VRE infections. Finally, we recommend guidelines' development for the appropriate administration of teicoplanin.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed457    
    Printed16    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded44    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal