Dataset Information

Feasibility of Antimicrobial Stewardship (AMS) in Critical Care Settings: A Multidisciplinary Approach Strategy.

ABSTRACT: Antimicrobial resistance is escalating and triggers clinical decision-making challenges when treating infections in patients admitted to intensive care units (ICU). Antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) may help combat this problem, but it can be difficult to implement in critical care settings. The implementation of multidisciplinary AMS in ICUs could be more challenging than what is currently suggested in the literature. Our main goal was to analyze the reduction in duration of treatment (DOT) for the most commonly used antibacterial and antifungal agents during the first six months of 2014, and during the same period two years later (2016). A total of 426 and 424 patient encounters, respectively, were documented and collected from the intensive care unit's electronic patient record system. Daily multidisciplinary ward rounds were conducted for approximately 30?40 min, with the goal of optimizing antimicrobial therapy in order to analyze the feasibility of implementing AMS. The only antimicrobial agent which showed a significant reduction in the number of prescriptions and in the duration of treatment during the second audit was vancomycin, while linezolid showed an increase in the number of prescriptions with no significant prolongation of the duration of treatment. A trend of reduction was also seen in the DOT for co-amoxiclavulanate and in the number of prescriptions of anidulafungin without any corresponding increases being observed for other broad-spectrum anti-infective agents (p-values of 0.07 and 0.05, respectively).

SUBMITTER: Tiszai-Szucs T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6024547 | biostudies-literature | 2018 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Feasibility of Antimicrobial Stewardship (AMS) in Critical Care Settings: A Multidisciplinary Approach Strategy.

Tiszai-Szucs Tamas T Mac Sweeney Claire C Keaveny Joseph J Bozza Fernando A FA O Hagan Zieta Z Martin-Loeches Ignacio I

Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) 20180525 2

Antimicrobial resistance is escalating and triggers clinical decision-making challenges when treating infections in patients admitted to intensive care units (ICU). Antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) may help combat this problem, but it can be difficult to implement in critical care settings. The implementation of multidisciplinary AMS in ICUs could be more challenging than what is currently suggested in the literature. Our main goal was to analyze the reduction in duration of treatment (DOT) for t ...[more]

PMID: 29799500

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background: Antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) are collaborative efforts to optimize antimicrobial use in healthcare institutions through evidence-based quality improvement strategies. With regard to critically ill patients, appropriate antimicrobial usage is of significance, and any delay in therapy increases their risk of mortality. Therefore, the implementation of structured multidisciplinary ASPs in critical care settings is of the utmost importance to promote the judicious use of antimicrobials. Methods: This quasi-experimental study evaluating a multidisciplinary ASP in a 20-bed critical care setting was conducted from January 1, 2016 to July 31, 2017. Outcomes were compared nine months before and after ASP implementation. The national antimicrobial stewardship toolkit by Ministry of health was reviewed and the hospital antibiotic prescribing policy was accordingly modified. The antimicrobial stewardship algorithm (Start Smart and Then Focus) and an ASP toolkit were distributed to all intensive care unit staff. Prospective audit and feedback, in addition to prescribing forms for common infectious diseases and education, were the primary antimicrobial strategies. Results: We found that the mean total monthly antimicrobial consumption measured as defined daily dose per 100 bed days was reduced by 25% (742.86 vs. 555.33; p = 0.110) compared to 7% in the control condition (tracer medications) (35.35 vs. 38.10; p = 0.735). Interestingly, there was a negative impact on cost in the post-intervention phase. Interestingly, the use of intravenous ceftriaxone measured as defined daily dose per 100 bed days was decreased by 82% (94.32 vs. 16.68; p = 0.008), whereas oral levofloxacin use was increased by 84% (26.75 vs. 172.29; p = 0.008) in the intensive care unit. Conclusion: Overall, involvement of higher administration in multidisciplinary ASP committees, daily audit and feedback by clinical pharmacists and physicians with infectious disease training, continuous educational activities about antimicrobial use and resistance, use of local antimicrobial prescribing guidelines based on up-to-date antibiogram, and support from the intensive care team can optimize antibiotic use in Saudi healthcare institutions.

Project description:BackgroundAntimicrobial stewardship programs have been established in hospitals, but less studied in long-term care facilities (LTCFs), a setting with unique challenges related to patient populations and available resources. This systematic review sought to provide a comprehensive assessment of antimicrobial stewardship interventions implemented in LTCFs, using meta-analysis to examine their impact on overall antimicrobial use.MethodsElectronic searches of MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL (1990 to July 2018) identified any antimicrobial stewardship interventions in LTCFs, with no restriction on patient population, study design, or outcomes. Intervention components were categorized using the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care taxonomy on implementation strategies. Random-effects meta-analysis used ratio of means to facilitate pooling of different metrics of antimicrobial use.ResultsEighteen studies (one randomized controlled trial [RCT], four cluster RCTs, four controlled pre/post studies, and nine uncontrolled pre/post studies) met inclusion, using 13 different antimicrobial stewardship intervention strategies; 15 studies used multifaceted (maximum, seven; median, four) interventions. The three most commonly implemented strategies were educational materials, educational meetings, and guideline implementation. Intervention labor intensity and resource requirements varied considerably among interventions. Meta-analysis of 11 studies demonstrated that antimicrobial stewardship strategies were associated with a 14% reduction in overall antimicrobial use (95% confidence interval = -8% to -20%; P < .0001), with similar results by study design but high heterogeneity (I2 = 86%) for the uncontrolled pre/post study subgroup and no heterogeneity (I2 = 0%) for the cluster RCT and controlled pre/post study subgroups. Funnel plot analysis suggested publication bias, with a lack of publication of smaller studies showing increased antibiotic use.ConclusionAntimicrobial stewardship strategies implemented in long-term care vary considerably in design and resource intensity, but collectively suggest potential to reduce antimicrobial use in this challenging setting. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:392-399, 2019.

Project description:BackgroundAntimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) have been shown to reduce inappropriate antimicrobial use and its consequences. However, these programs lack legislative requirements in many places and it can be difficult to determine what human resources are required for these programs and how to create a business case to present to hospital administrators for program funding. The objectives of the current paper were to review legislative requirements and outline human resource requirements for ASPs, and to create a base business case for ASPs.MethodsA working group of antimicrobial stewardship experts from across Canada met to discuss the necessary components for creation of a business case for antimicrobial stewardship. A narrative review of the literature of the regulatory requirements and human resource recommendations for ASPs was conducted. Informed by the review and using a consensus decision-making process, the expert working group developed human resource recommendations based on a 1000 bed acute care health care facility in Canada. A spreadsheet based business case model for ASPs was also created.ResultsLegislative and /or regulatory requirements for ASPs were found in 2 countries and one state jurisdiction. The literature review and consensus development process recommended the following minimum human resources complement: 1 physician, 3 pharmacists, 0.5 program administrative and coordination support, and 0.4 data analyst support as full time equivalents (FTEs) per 1000 acute care beds. Necessary components for the business case model, including the human resource requirements, were determined to create a spreadsheet based model.ConclusionsThere is evidence to support the negative outcomes of inappropriate antimicrobial use as well as the benefits of ASPs. Legislative and /or regulatory requirements for ASPs are not common. The available evidence for human resource recommendations for ASPs using a narrative review process was examined and a base business case modelling scenario was created. As regulatory requirements for ASPs increase, it will be necessary to create accurate business cases for ASPs in order to obtain the necessary funding to render these programs successful.

Project description:ImportanceThe feasibility of core Infectious Diseases Society of America-recommended antimicrobial stewardship interventions in community hospitals is unknown.ObjectiveTo determine the feasibility and results of implementing 2 core stewardship intervention strategies in community hospitals.Design, setting, and participantsThree-stage, multicenter, prospective nonrandomized clinical trial with crossover design. The setting was 4 community hospitals in North Carolina (median bed size, 305; range, 102-425). Participants were all patients receiving targeted study antibacterial agents or alternative, nonstudy antibacterial agents. The study dates were October 2014 through October 2015. All statistical analyses were completed as of October 2016.InterventionsTwo antimicrobial stewardship strategies targeted vancomycin hydrochloride, piperacillin-tazobactam, and the antipseudomonal carbapenems on formulary at the study hospitals: (1) modified preauthorization (PA), in which the prescriber had to receive pharmacist approval for continued use of the antibiotic after the first dose, and (2) postprescription audit and review (PPR), in which the pharmacist would engage the prescriber about antibiotic appropriateness after 72 hours of therapy. Two hospitals performed modified PA for 6 months, then PPR for 6 months after a 1-month washout. The other 2 hospitals performed the reverse.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was the feasibility of implementing the interventions, determined by (1) approval by hospital administration and committees at each study hospital; (2) completion of pharmacist training; (3) initiation and implementation as determined by number, type, and outcomes of interventions performed; and (4) time required for interventions. Secondary outcomes included antimicrobial use (days of therapy) compared with matched historical periods and length of hospitalization.ResultsA total of 2692 patients (median age, 65 years; interquartile range, 53-76 years) underwent a study intervention; 1413 (52.5%) were female, 1323 (49.1%) were white, and 1047 (38.9%) were African American. Intervention approvals took a median of 95 days (range, 56-119 days); during these discussions, strict PA was deemed not feasible. Instead, the modified PA intervention was used throughout the study. Pharmacists performed 1456 modified PA interventions (median per hospital, 350 [range, 129-628]) and 1236 PPR interventions (median per hospital, 298 [range, 273-366]). Study antimicrobials were determined to be inappropriate 2 times as often during the PPR period (41.0% [435 of 1060] vs 20.4% [253 of 1243]; P < .001). Pharmacists recommended dose change more often during the modified PA intervention (15.9% [232 of 1456] vs 9.6% [119 of 1236]; P < .001) and de-escalation during PPR (29.1% [360 of 1236] vs 13.0% [190 of 1456]; P < .001). The median time dedicated to the stewardship interventions varied by hospital (range of median hours per week, 5-19). Overall antibiotic use decreased during PPR compared with historical controls (mean [SD] days of therapy per 1000 patient-days, 925.2 [109.8] vs 965.3 [109.4]; mean difference, -40.1; 95% CI, -71.7 to -8.6), but not during modified PA (mean [SD] days of therapy per 1000 patient-days, 931.0 [102.0] vs 926.6 [89.7]; mean difference, 4.4; 95% CI, -55.8 to 64.7).Conclusions and relevanceStrict PA was not feasible in the study hospitals. In contrast, PPR was a feasible and effective strategy for antimicrobial stewardship in settings with limited resources and expertise.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02212808.

Dataset Information

Feasibility of Antimicrobial Stewardship (AMS) in Critical Care Settings: A Multidisciplinary Approach Strategy.

Publications

Feasibility of Antimicrobial Stewardship (AMS) in Critical Care Settings: A Multidisciplinary Approach Strategy.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets