Development and Assessment of a Physician-Specific Antimicrobial Usage and Spectrum Feedback Tool.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: McIntyre MT
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6300305 | biostudies-literature | 2017
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Development and Assessment of a Physician-Specific Antimicrobial Usage and Spectrum Feedback Tool.
McIntyre Mark T MT Naik Lopa L Bell Chaim M CM Morris Andrew M AM
Open forum infectious diseases 20170617 3
Individualized data are required but difficult to obtain for effective antimicrobial stewardship audit and feedback. We developed a summative tool to evaluate consumption (days of therapy per 100 patient-days) and spectrum of antimicrobials that was also acceptable to individual clinicians. ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Inadequate physician training and involvement in addictions treatment are barriers to integrating mental health and addiction services in public behavioral health care. The authors designed and implemented the Dual Diagnosis Physician-infrastructure Assessment Tool (DDPAT) to quantify statewide dimensions of this workforce problem.The DDPAT examined institutional dual diagnosis capability and physician workforce, training backgrounds, and clinical roles across Indiana's 30 community mental health centers (CMHCs), six psychiatric hospitals, and 13 addiction treatment centers.All treatment centers and 75% of physicians responded. Sixty-nine percent of all treatment centers and 97% of CMHCs reported dual diagnosis capability. However, 29% of physicians treated both mental illness and addictions, and only 8% had certification in an addiction specialty. Overall workforce shortages, particularly of younger psychiatrists, contextualized these findings.The DDPAT identified multiple deficiencies in the physician workforce with respect to dual diagnosis and addictions care in Indiana. The DDPAT may be useful for characterizing similar trends in other states.
| S-EPMC2882634 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionPsoriasis Area Severity Index (PASI) assessment is complex and time-consuming. A simpler assessment measure more sensitive to changes in symptom severity and predictive of patients' quality of life (Dermatology Life Quality Index, DLQI) is needed. This study aims to evaluate the Optimal Psoriasis Assessment Tool (OPAT) as an alternative to PASI.MethodsThis integrated analysis of three UNCOVER trials (NCT01474512, NCT01597245, and NCT01646177) randomized patients (N = 3866) with moderate-to-severe psoriasis to subcutaneously administered ixekizumab 80 mg Q2W or Q4W, or placebo or etanercept 50 mg Q2W. Pearson correlations were computed for clinical and patient-reported measures with PASI and DLQI.ResultsAs the correlations with PASI and BSA were high and not much higher when adding severity, body surface area (BSA) was used for the clinical measure. BSA was the main measure influencing OPAT. Week 12 regression analyses results showed that PASI had a higher correlation with BSA combined with patient assessments than with BSA alone. Sensitivity analyses were also completed for PASI 75 and 90. For DLQI, correlations with the combined measures were even stronger than with BSA alone. A comprehensive model selection procedure was conducted, which illustrated that the two-term models are preferred.ConclusionThe OPAT is a simple and time-saving alternative to PASI. It can be derived using BSA and patient-reported assessments having strong correlation with PASI and moderate correlation with DLQI.
| S-EPMC8322262 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Inappropriate antimicrobial prescribing is considered to be the leading cause of high burden of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in resource-constrained lower- and middle-income countries. Under its global action plan, the World Health Organization has envisaged tackling the AMR threat through promotion of rational antibiotic use among prescribers. Given the lack of consensus definitions and other associated challenges, we sought to devise and validate an Antimicrobial Rationality Assessment Tool-AmRAT-for standardizing the assessment of appropriateness of antimicrobial prescribing. A consensus algorithm was developed by a multidisciplinary team consisting of intensivists, internal medicine practitioners, clinical pharmacologists, and infectious disease experts. The tool was piloted by 10 raters belonging to three groups of antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) personnel: Master of Pharmacology (M.Sc.) (n = 3, group A), Doctor of Medicine (MD) residents (n = 3, group B), and DM residents in clinical pharmacology (n = 4, group C) using retrospective patient data from 30 audit and feedback forms collected as part of an existing AMS program. Percentage agreement and the kappa (κ) coefficients were used to measure inter-rater agreements amongst themselves and with expert opinion. Sensitivity and specificity estimates were analyzed comparing their assessments against the gold standard. For the overall assessment of rationality, the mean percent agreement with experts was 76.7% for group A, 68.9% for group B, and 77.5% for group C. The kappa values indicated moderate agreement for all raters in group A (κ 0.47-0.57), and fair to moderate in group B (κ 0.22-0.46) as well as group C (κ 0.37-0.60). Sensitivity and specificity for the same were 80% and 68.6%, respectively. Though evaluated by raters with diverse educational background and variable AMS experience in this pilot study, our tool demonstrated high percent agreement and good sensitivity and specificity, assuring confidence in its utility for assessing appropriateness of antimicrobial prescriptions in resource-constrained healthcare environments.
| S-EPMC7923130 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Numerous instruments have been developed to assess patient reported outcomes; most approaches however focus on a single condition. With the increasing prevalence of multimorbidity, this might no longer be appropriate. Moreover, a more comprehensive approach that facilitates shared decision making and stimulates self-management is most likely more valuable for clinical practice than a questionnaire alone. This study aims to transform the Assessment of Burden of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) (ABC)-tool into the Assessment of Burden of Chronic Conditions (ABCC)-tool for COPD, asthma, and diabetes mellitus type 2 (DM2). The tool consists of a scale, a visualisation of the outcomes, and treatment advice. METHODS:Requirements for the tool were formulated. Questionnaires were developed based on a literature study of existing questionnaires, clinical guidelines, interviews with patients and healthcare providers, and input from an expert group. Cut-off points and treatment advice were determined to display the results and to provide practical recommendations. RESULTS:The ABCC-scale consists of a generic questionnaire and disease-specific questionnaires, which can be combined into a single individualized questionnaire for each patient. Results are displayed in one balloon chart, and each domain includes practical recommendations. CONCLUSIONS:The ABCC-tool is expected to facilitate conversations between a patient and a healthcare provider, and to help formulate treatment plans and care plans with personalised goals. By facilitating an integrated approach, this instrument can be applied in a variety of circumstances and disease combinations.
| S-EPMC6958572 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPostprescription review and feedback (PPRF) is one of the most common strategies in antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP) intervention. However, disagreements between the prescribers and ASP personnel can occur. The aim of the present study was to identify the factors associated with nonadherence to PPRF intervention.MethodsThe present retrospective nested case-control study was performed at a tertiary care center, which has been conducting a once-weekly PPRF for carbapenems and piperacillin/tazobactam since 2014. Nonadherence to ASP recommendations was defined as the failure of the primary care team to modify or stop antimicrobial therapy 72 hours after the issuance of PPRF recommendations. Factors associated with nonadherence to PPRF intervention were identified using multivariate logistic regression analysis.ResultsIn total, 2466 instances of PPRF in 1714 cases between April 2014 and September 2019 were found. The nonadherence rate was 5.9%, and 44 cases were found in which carbapenems or piperacillin/tazobactam continued to be used against PPRF recommendations. Factors associated with nonadherence to PPRF recommendations were a previous history of hospitalization within 90 days (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.62; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.18-5.81) and a rapidly fatal McCabe score at the time of PPRF intervention (aOR, 2.87; 95% CI, 1.18-6.98). A review of the narrative comments in the electronic medical records indicated that common reasons for nonadherence were "the patient was sick" (n = 12; 27.3%) and "the antimicrobial seemed to be clinically effective" (n = 9; 20.5%).ConclusionsNonadherence to PPRF recommendations was relatively uncommon at the study institution. However, patients with a severe disease condition frequently continued to receive broad-spectrum antimicrobials against PPRF recommendations. Understanding physicians' cognitive process in nonadherence to ASP recommendations and ASP interventions targeting medical subspecialties caring for severely ill patients is needed to improve ASP.
| S-EPMC7434090 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionFormative evaluations of clinical teaching for emergency medicine (EM) faculty are limited. The goal of this study was to develop a behaviorally-based tool for evaluating and providing feedback to EM faculty based on their clinical teaching skills during a shift.MethodsWe used a three-phase structured development process. Phase 1 used the nominal group technique with a group of faculty first and then with residents to generate potential evaluation items. Phase 2 included separate focus groups and used a modified Delphi technique with faculty and residents, as well as a group of experts to evaluate the items generated in Phase 1. Following this, residents classified the items into novice, intermediate, and advanced educator skills. Once items were determined for inclusion and subsequently ranked they were built into the tool by the investigators (Phase 3).ResultsThe final instrument, the "Faculty Shift Card," is a behaviorally-anchored evaluation and feedback tool used to facilitate feedback to EM faculty about their teaching skills during a shift. The tool has four domains: teaching clinical decision-making; teaching interpersonal skills; teaching procedural skills; and general teaching strategies. Each domain contains novice, intermediate, and advanced sections with 2-5 concrete examples for each level of performance.ConclusionThis structured process resulted in a well-grounded and systematically developed evaluation tool for EM faculty that can provide real-time actionable feedback to faculty and support improved clinical teaching.
| S-EPMC6324693 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background :While leadership training is increasingly incorporated into residency education, existing assessment tools to provide feedback on leadership skills are only applicable in limited contexts. Objective :We developed an instrument, the Leadership Observation and Feedback Tool (LOFT), for assessing clinical leadership. Methods :We used an iterative process to develop the tool, beginning with adapting the Leadership Practices Inventory to create an open-ended survey for identification of clinical leadership behaviors. We presented these to leadership experts who defined essential behaviors through a modified Delphi approach. In May 2014 we tested the resulting 29-item tool among residents in the internal medicine and pediatrics departments at 2 academic medical centers. We analyzed instrument performance using Cronbach's alpha, interrater reliability using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), and item performance using linear-by-linear test comparisons of responses by postgraduate year, site, and specialty. Results :A total of 377 (of 526, 72%) team members completed the LOFT for 95 (of 519, 18%) residents. Overall ratings were high-only 14% scored at the novice level. Cronbach's alpha was 0.79, and the ICC ranged from 0.20 to 0.79. Linear-by-linear test comparisons revealed significant differences between postgraduate year groups for some items, but no significant differences by site or specialty. Acceptability and usefulness ratings by respondents were high. Conclusions :Despite a rigorous approach to instrument design, we were unable to collect convincing validity evidence for our instrument. The tool may still have some usefulness for providing formative feedback to residents on their clinical leadership skills.
| S-EPMC6194892 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundThe context of healthcare organizations such as hospitals is increasingly accepted as having the potential to influence the use of new knowledge. However, the mechanisms by which the organizational context influences evidence-based practices are not well understood. Current measures of organizational context lack a theory-informed approach, lack construct clarity and generally have modest psychometric properties. This paper presents the development and initial psychometric validation of the Alberta Context Tool (ACT), an eight dimension measure of organizational context for healthcare settings.MethodsThree principles guided the development of the ACT: substantive theory, brevity, and modifiability. The Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARiHS) framework and related literature were used to guide selection of items in the ACT. The ACT was required to be brief enough to be tolerated in busy and resource stretched work settings and to assess concepts of organizational context that were potentially modifiable. The English version of the ACT was completed by 764 nurses (752 valid responses) working in seven Canadian pediatric care hospitals as part of its initial validation. Cronbach's alpha, exploratory factor analysis, analysis of variance, and tests of association were used to assess instrument reliability and validity.ResultsFactor analysis indicated a 13-factor solution (accounting for 59.26% of the variance in 'organizational context'). The composition of the factors was similar to those originally conceptualized. Cronbach's alpha for the 13 factors ranged from .54 to .91 with 4 factors performing below the commonly accepted alpha cut off of .70. Bivariate associations between instrumental research utilization levels (which the ACT was developed to predict) and the ACT's 13 factors were statistically significant at the 5% level for 12 of the 13 factors. Each factor also showed a trend of increasing mean score ranging from the lowest level to the highest level of instrumental research use, indicating construct validity.ConclusionsTo date, no completely satisfactory measures of organizational context are available for use in healthcare. The ACT assesses several core domains to provide a comprehensive account of organizational context in healthcare settings. The tool's strengths are its brevity (allowing it to be completed in busy healthcare settings) and its focus on dimensions of organizational context that are modifiable. Refinements of the instrument for acute, long term care, and home care settings are ongoing.
| S-EPMC2805628 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background'Mitochondrial Myopathy' (MM) refers to genetically-confirmed Primary Mitochondrial Disease (PMD) that predominantly impairs skeletal muscle function. Validated outcome measures encompassing core MM domains of muscle weakness, muscle fatigue, imbalance, impaired dexterity, and exercise intolerance do not exist. The goal of this study was to validate clinically-meaningful, quantitative outcome measures specific to MM.MethodsThis was a single centre study. Objective measures evaluated included hand-held dynamometry, balance assessments, Nine Hole Peg Test (9HPT), Functional Dexterity Test (FDT), 30 second Sit to Stand (30s STS), and 6-minute walk test (6MWT). Results were assessed as z-scores, with < -2 standard deviations considered abnormal. Performance relative to the North Star Ambulatory Assessment (NSAA) of functional mobility was assessed by Pearson's correlation.ResultsIn genetically-confirmed MM participants [n = 59, mean age 21.6 ± 13.9 (range 7 - 64.6 years), 44.1% male], with nuclear gene aetiologies, n = 18/59, or mitochondrial (mtDNA) aetiologies, n = 41/59, dynamometry measurements demonstrated both proximal [dominant elbow flexion (-2.6 ± 2.1, mean z-score ± standard deviation, SD), hip flexion (-2.5 ± 2.3), and knee flexion (-2.8 ± 1.3)] and distal muscle weakness [wrist extension (-3.4 ± 1.7), palmar pinch (-2.5 ± 2.8), and ankle dorsiflexion (-2.4 ± 2.5)]. Balance [Tandem Stance (TS) Eyes Open (-3.2 ± 8.8, n = 53) and TS Eyes Closed (-2.6 ± 2.7, n = 52)] and dexterity [FDT (-5.9 ± 6.0, n = 44) and 9HPT (-8.3 ± 11.2, n = 53)] assessments also revealed impairment. Exercise intolerance was confirmed by strength-based 30s STS test (-2.0 ± 0.8, n = 38) and mobility-based 6MWT mean z-score (-2.9 ± 1.3, n = 46) with significant decline in minute distances (slope -0.9, p = 0.03, n = 46). Muscle fatigue was quantified by dynamometry repetitions with strength decrement noted between first and sixth repetitions at dominant elbow flexors (-14.7 ± 2.2%, mean ± standard error, SEM, n = 21). All assessments were incorporated in the MM-Composite Assessment Tool (MM-COAST). MM-COAST composite score for MM participants was 1.3± 0.1(n = 53) with a higher score indicating greater MM disease severity, and correlated to NSAA (r = 0.64, p < 0.0001, n = 52) to indicate clinical meaning. Test-retest reliability of MM-COAST assessments in an MM subset (n = 14) revealed an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) of 0.81 (95% confidence interval: 0.59-0.92) indicating good reliability.ConclusionsWe have developed and successfully validated a MM-specific Composite Assessment Tool to quantify the key domains of MM, shown to be abnormal in a Definite MM cohort. MM-COAST may hold particular utility as a meaningful outcome measure in future MM intervention trials.
| S-EPMC8782422 | biostudies-literature
Project description:It has been widely recognised that a significant proportion of the world's population suffer inequalities in accessing high quality healthcare and wider services. Within healthcare, antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a global threat to public health affecting all healthcare systems and growing at an alarming pace. To ensure that national AMR campaigns developed by Public Health England are inclusive of all populations within the target audience a health equity assessment tool (HEAT) was used. The project leads for each campaign completed the HEAT independently with a follow up meeting with the study team to discuss and clarify the responses. A trend analysis was carried out with common themes being used to provide recommendations. The campaigns have demonstrated equality and diversity based on the requirements of the Equality Act 2010, particularly age, sex, and race protected characteristics. Some notable results include the translation of website materials in over 30 languages and reaching individuals in 122 countries. It was however noted that several of the protected characteristics were not applicable. The continuous development of resources with collaboration from a variety of diverse user groups would be advantageous towards aiding future campaign reach. The use of the HEAT has demonstrated the ease and cost-effective way to assess any health inequalities and would be a useful addition to antimicrobial stewardship and public health campaigns.
| S-EPMC6784169 | biostudies-literature