antibiotics: empiric coverages…what am I doing wrong?

[lightthelamp4]

Hey guys
third year here, things are going well overall in clinic and boards etc; I am posting here to try to get some advise on how to memorize abx coverages/empiric treatments. For some reason this has been the hardest subject matter for me to commit to memory. I have the stanford guide, and I know how to look things up and all for rotations but I am a worried about step 2. Any advise would be appreciated!

thanks

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Venko]

I found the EMRA antibiotic guide easier to remember and easier to use rapidly in clinical situations. You may want to check it out and see if it helps

 

[ACSurgeon]

Abx are hard to remember because it's often dealer's choice. A lot of Abx are used improperly, which makes it difficult to learn as a trainee.

 

[D elegans]

Abx are hard to remember because it's often dealer's choice. A lot of Abx are used improperly, which makes it difficult to learn as a trainee.

Saw a doc prescribe a "low dose" abx (ceftriaxone) bc he didn't know what was going on with a patient. Spooky

 

[Rendar5]

Nothing wrong with using empiric antibix if you don't know what's going on with the patient. Sometimes you have to if the differential is very broad and includes potentially lethal infections. That said, ceftriaxone itself is not sufficiently broad for all cases.

 

[D elegans]

Nothing wrong with using empiric antibix if you don't know what's going on with the patient. Sometimes you have to if the differential is very broad and includes potentially lethal infections. That said, ceftriaxone itself is not sufficiently broad for all cases.

Empiric abx are definitely appropriate in many circumstances, I failed to give much information but trust me the pt had no evidence of infection. The main points were the concept of "low dose" abx as well as the curious choice of ceftriaxone, which is all to say that yes, some physicians order abx very inappropriately