ArticleClinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America2026
Patient-reported Perceptions, Experiences, and Preferences Around Intravenous and Oral Antibiotics for the Treatment of Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia: A Descriptive Qualitative Study.
Article in Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07384702 (Phase 2 Platform Randomized, Multicentre and Open Trial on the Efficacy and Safety of Clopidogrel as Adjuvant Drug in Staphylococcus Aureus Bacteraemia), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Phase 2 Platform Randomized, Multicentre and Open Trial on the Efficacy and Safety of Clopidogrel as Adjuvant Drug in Staphylococcus Aureus Bacteraemia (CLOPI-SNAP)
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Inpatients' willingness to accept antibiotic intravenous-to-oral switch therapy and its influencing factors: a qualitative study based on the Health Belief Model.BMC infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Real-World Comparison of Intravenous vs. Oral Antimicrobial Therapy for Bone and Joint Infections.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere is growing evidence to support partial oral antibiotic treatment of severe infections such as Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia, but clinical practice is slow to adopt this paradigm. We know little about how patients with severe infection experience and perceive intravenous and oral antibiotics in terms of quality of life and clinical effectiveness. We performed a qualitative study to elicit patients' views on treatment with intravenous and oral antibiotics, aiming to provide insights that could inform collaborative treatment decision-making.
methodsWe conducted semi-structured interviews with participants in the Staphylococcus aureus Network Adaptive Platform trial pharmacological sub-study PR-O-SNAP by telephone, in person, or via video conferencing. Interviews were recorded, transcribed and coded, and used to analyze and identify themes. Interviews occurred in 2 phases between November 2024 and January 2025, with interim analysis to refine interview questions between each phase.
resultsWe interviewed 17 patients who had received sequential intravenous then oral antibiotics for treatment of Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Overall, most participants preferred oral antibiotics for their convenience, which enabled improved mobility and independence, despite a perception that oral regimens were more complex and likely to cause side effects, and that intravenous antibiotics were more effective.
conclusionsChoosing a route of antibiotic administration for treatment of severe infection is a nuanced decision which should incorporate not just a patient's clinical status but also their preferences and personal context. Patient convenience and functional goals should be considered in treatment discussions between clinicians and patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.