Back

Antifungal use with and without fungal diagnoses in septic shock across U.S. hospitals, 2022-2024

Flick, R. J.; Yan, L.; Law, A. C.; Hochberg, C.; Levy, J.; Iwashyna, T. J.; Bosch, N. A.

2026-06-30 intensive care and critical care medicine
10.64898/2026.06.29.26355232 medRxiv
Show abstract

Septic shock caused by fungal organisms is characterized by high mortality and diagnostic complexity. We used the Premier Healthcare Database to characterize antifungal use and fungal diagnoses among adults with septic shock requiring vasopressors admitted between October 2022 through July 2024. Among 12.8 million admission at 886 hospitals, 554,948 met septic shock criteria and were included for analysis. A fungal diagnosis was established in 11,405 (2.1%) of encounters; of these, 3,565 (31.3%) received intravenous antifungal therapy within one day of vasopressor initiation. In the overall cohort, antifungal therapy was initiated in 29,824 (5.5%) within one day of vasopressor initiation; of these, 3,656 (12.2%) were ultimately diagnosed with a fungal infection. In the 116 hospitals reporting microbiological data, a subgroup of 489 encounters with septic shock and culture-confirmed candidemia was identified. In this subgroup, intravenous antifungal therapy was initiated in 43.8% within one day, 63.8% within three days, and 78.9% within seven days. These findings highlight a profound decoupling between fungal diagnosis and treatment--few patients receiving antifungals were diagnosed with an infection that would be treated by these agents, while less than half of patients with septic shock and candidemia received timely treatment. Strategies for greater precision in empiric antifungal use in septic shock are needed to improve safety, stewardship, and outcomes.

Matching journals

The top 9 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
JAMA Network Open
130 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
12.6%
2
Critical Care Explorations
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.7%
3
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 23%
7.3%
4
Journal of General Internal Medicine
21 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.4%
5
Wellcome Open Research
67 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.5%
6
Critical Care Medicine
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.5%
7
The Journal of Infectious Diseases
202 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.3%
8
International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.3%
9
Nature Communications
5641 papers in training set
Top 35%
3.2%
50% of probability mass above
10
The Lancet
16 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.2%
11
Frontiers in Medicine
120 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.8%
12
BMJ
51 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.4%
13
Journal of Clinical Microbiology
130 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
2.1%
14
Microbiology Spectrum
469 papers in training set
Top 6%
2.1%
15
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 50%
1.9%
16
eLife
5828 papers in training set
Top 52%
1.5%
17
European Respiratory Journal
59 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.5%
18
Clinical Microbiology and Infection
62 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.4%
19
Critical Care
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.3%
20
Clinical Infectious Diseases
235 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
21
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology
17 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.1%
22
mSphere
302 papers in training set
Top 6%
1.0%
23
BMJ Open
601 papers in training set
Top 12%
1.0%
24
PLOS Biology
486 papers in training set
Top 11%
0.9%
25
The Lancet Digital Health
25 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.9%
26
Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy
46 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.9%
27
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
71 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
28
American Journal of Epidemiology
67 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
29
Nature
645 papers in training set
Top 10%
0.8%
30
Clinical Chemistry
22 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.8%