Teicoplanin possesses several convenient properties for use in the delivery of outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) services. However, its use is not widespread and data on its efficacy in the OPAT setting are limited. Here we present a case series of patients undergoing OPAT care being treated by either teicoplanin-based (n = 107) or ceftriaxone-based (n = 191) antibiotic regimens. Clinical failure with teicoplanin occurred in five episodes of care (4.7%) compared with only two episodes of ceftriaxone-based OPAT care (1.0%). Teicoplanin-associated clinical failure was observed in 2 (33.3%) of 6 patients with Enterococcus infections compared with 3 (3.0%) of 101 patients with non-Enterococcus infections. Overall, there were four (2.9%) drug-related adverse events for teicoplanin and four (1.8%) for ceftriaxone, prompting a switch to teicoplanin in three patients. These findings support the continued use of teicoplanin in OPAT as well as its consideration in centres where it is not currently being offered.