Thirty-five patients underwent 38 treatment courses with cefotaxime. Documented infections included 11 bacteremias, 7 cases of nosocomial pneumonia, 6 surgical wound infections, 3 bone infections, 1 biliary infection, and 1 urinary tract infection. Granulocytopenic patients with fever received 15 courses of empiric cefotaxime therapy alone; in 8 courses, no definite site of infection or pathogen was isolated. Broad-spectrum antibiotics had been administered to 23 patients before cefotaxime. Thirty-seven bacterial pathogens were isolated from 25 patients. Three such pathogens were resistant to cefotaxime and required alternative therapies. Pathogenic isolates included 13 Serratia marcescens, 12 Pseudomonas aeruginosa, 4 Escherichia coli, 2 Klebsiella pneumoniae, 2 Providencia stuartii, 1 Enterobacter cloacae, 1 Haemophilus influenzae, 1 Enterococcus, and 1 Staphylococcus aureus. Of the treatment courses, 25 of 38 resulted in a favorable response to cefotaxime, including 9 of 15 in granulocytopenic patients. Superinfection was seen in one patient. The emergence of resistance was documented in another patient. Of 15 patients with multiply resistant pathogens, 12 improved with cefotaxime. Of 12 patients with Pseudomonas aeruginosa, 6 favorably responded. Possible complications of cefotaxime were observed in 14 of 42 treatment courses. Cefotaxime is most useful in treatment of infections due to multiply resistant, gram-negative pathogens other than Pseudomonas aeruginosa.

No abstract

Editor-News that pressing financial problems have caused NHS trusts in Suffolk to set new "thresholds" to treatments such as joint replacements reinforces concerns raised by a recent BMA survey of medical directors of trusts in which over a third of respondents anticipated reductions of key services in response to funding shortfalls. What has hitherto escaped comment is how cuts in services are far more likely to be felt in some parts of the country than others.Deficits in the NHS are invariably presented as a problem of financial mismanagement, but the pattern of deficits shows that the current resource allocation model discriminates against particular communities. According to the recently published accounts for 3 89 out of 303 (30%) English primary care trusts ended the year in deficit. The table shows how 301 of these trusts are distributed accorded to fifths of deprivation and rurality.Primary care trusts serving populations that are in both the most rural and the least deprived fifth were most likely to be in financial difficulties. Seventeen of the 25 (68%) in this category were in deficit. These trusts received the lowest funding allocation per head (£995). By contrast, only 3% (one of 34) of the primary care trusts serving populations that are in both the most urban and the most deprived fifths failed to break even in 2004-5. These trusts received the highest funding allocations per head (£1405).This shows that poor financial management can at best only partly explain why some trusts are in deficit. The pattern of deficits implies that NHS funding provides insufficient resources for rural areas, for comparatively affluent areas, and, most particularly, for areas that are both rural and affluent. The risk is that such measures will result in NHS services being subject to a new postcode lottery, in which rural residents are more likely to lose out. Sheena Asthana professor of health policy

No abstract