Dataset Information

Assessment of the Appropriateness of Antimicrobial Use in US Hospitals.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Hospital antimicrobial consumption data are widely available; however, large-scale assessments of the quality of antimicrobial use in US hospitals are limited.

Objective

To evaluate the appropriateness of antimicrobial use for hospitalized patients treated for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) or urinary tract infection (UTI) present at admission or for patients who had received fluoroquinolone or intravenous vancomycin treatment.

Design, setting, and participants

This cross-sectional study included data from a prevalence survey of hospitalized patients in 10 Emerging Infections Program sites. Random samples of inpatients on hospital survey dates from May 1 to September 30, 2015, were identified. Medical record data were collected for eligible patients with 1 or more of 4 treatment events (CAP, UTI, fluoroquinolone treatment, or vancomycin treatment), which were selected on the basis of common infection types reported and antimicrobials given to patients in the prevalence survey. Data were analyzed from August 1, 2017, to May 31, 2020.

Exposure

Antimicrobial treatment for CAP or UTI or with fluoroquinolones or vancomycin.

Main outcomes and measures

The percentage of antimicrobial use that was supported by medical record data (including infection signs and symptoms, microbiology test results, and antimicrobial treatment duration) or for which some aspect of use was unsupported. Unsupported antimicrobial use was defined as (1) use of antimicrobials to which the pathogen was not susceptible, use in the absence of documented infection signs or symptoms, or use without supporting microbiologic data; (2) use of antimicrobials that deviated from recommended guidelines; or (3) use that exceeded the recommended duration.

Results

Of 12 299 patients, 1566 patients (12.7%) in 192 hospitals were included; the median age was 67 years (interquartile range, 53-79 years), and 864 (55.2%) were female. A total of 219 patients (14.0%) were included in the CAP analysis, 452 (28.9%) in the UTI analysis, 550 (35.1%) in the fluoroquinolone analysis, and 403 (25.7%) in the vancomycin analysis; 58 patients (3.7%) were included in both fluoroquinolone and vancomycin analyses. Overall, treatment was unsupported for 876 of 1566 patients (55.9%; 95% CI, 53.5%-58.4%): 110 of 403 (27.3%) who received vancomycin, 256 of 550 (46.6%) who received fluoroquinolones, 347 of 452 (76.8%) with a diagnosis of UTI, and 174 of 219 (79.5%) with a diagnosis of CAP. Among patients with unsupported treatment, common reasons included excessive duration (103 of 174 patients with CAP [59.2%]) and lack of documented infection signs or symptoms (174 of 347 patients with UTI [50.1%]).

Conclusions and relevance

The findings suggest that standardized assessments of hospital antimicrobial prescribing quality can be used to estimate the appropriateness of antimicrobial use in large groups of hospitals. These assessments, performed over time, may inform evaluations of the effects of antimicrobial stewardship initiatives nationally.

SUBMITTER: Magill SS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7974639 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Importance:Surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis (SAP) is a common indication for antibiotic use in hospitals and is associated with high rates of inappropriateness. Objective:To describe the SAP prescribing practices and assess hospital, surgical, and patient factors associated with appropriate SAP prescribing. Design, Setting, and Participants:Multicenter, national, quality improvement study with retrospective analysis of data collected from Australian hospitals via Surgical National Antimicrobial Prescribing Survey audits from January 1, 2016, to June 30, 2018. Data were analyzed using multivariable logistic regression. Crude estimates of appropriateness were adjusted for factors included in the model by calculating estimated marginal means and presented as adjusted-appropriateness with 95% confidence intervals. Main Outcomes and Measures:Adjusted appropriateness and factors associated with inappropriate prescriptions. Results:A total of 9351 surgical episodes and 15 395 prescriptions (10 740 procedural and 4655 postprocedural) were analyzed. Crude appropriateness of total prescriptions was 48.7% (7492 prescriptions). The adjusted appropriateness of each surgical procedure group was low for procedural SAP, ranging from 33.7% (95% CI, 26.3%-41.2%) for dentoalveolar surgery to 68.9% (95% CI, 63.2%-74.5%) for neurosurgery. The adjusted appropriateness of postprocedural prescriptions was also low, ranging from 21.5% (95% CI, 13.4%-29.7%) for breast surgery to 58.7% (95% CI, 47.9%-69.4%) for ophthalmological procedures. The most common reason for inappropriate procedural SAP was incorrect timing (44.9%), while duration greater than 24 hours was the most common reason for inappropriate postprocedural SAP (54.3%). Conclusions and Relevance:High rates of inappropriate procedural and postprocedural antimicrobial use were demonstrated across all surgical specialties. Reasons for inappropriateness, such as timing and duration, varied according to the type of SAP and surgical specialty. These findings highlight the need for improvement in SAP prescribing and suggest potential targeted areas for action.

Project description:ObjectiveTo delineate the prevalence and factors associated with antimicrobial use across six referral hospitals in Tanzania using WHO point prevalence survey (PPS) methodology to inform hospital-specific antimicrobial stewardship programmes.DesignCross-sectional analytical study.SettingSix referral hospitals in Tanzania.ParticipantsPatients irrespective of age and gender (n=948) admitted in the six referral hospital wards before 8:00 hours on each day of the survey were included in December 2019. Using the WHO PPS methodology, data on hospitals, wards, patients, antibiotics, and indications for antibiotics were collected.Outcome measuresWe analysed the prevalence of antibiotic use by referral hospital, ward, indication and patient characteristics as the main outcomes. We also described adherence to the Tanzania Standard Treatment Guidelines (STG) and WHO's AWaRe categorisation of antibiotics.ResultsApproximately 62.3% of inpatients were prescribed antibiotics, predominantly from the Access group of antibiotics (ceftriaxone, metronidazole or ampicillin-cloxacillin). The overall adherence of antibiotic prescriptions to the Tanzania STG was high (84.0%), with the exception of Sekou Toure Regional Referral Hospital (68.0%) and Maweni Regional Referral Hospital (57.8%). The most common indication for antibiotic prescriptions was community-acquired infections (39.8%). Children less than 2 years of age (OR 1.73, 95% CI 1.02 to 2.92, p=0.039); admission to surgical wards (OR 4.90, 95% CI 2.87 to 8.36, p <0.001); and admission to paediatric wards (OR 3.93, 95% CI 2.16 to 7.15, p <0.001) were associated with increased odds of antibiotic use. Only 2 of 591 patients were prescribed antibiotics based on culture and antimicrobial susceptibility testing results.ConclusionsEmpirical use of antibiotics is common, and the Access group of antibiotics is predominantly prescribed in children less than 2 years and patients admitted to surgical and paediatric wards. Lack of utilisation of antimicrobial susceptibility testing services in these hospitals requires urgent interventions. Routine monitoring of antibiotic use is recommended to be part of antibiotic stewardship programmes in Tanzania.

Project description:ImportanceInappropriate antimicrobial drug use is associated with adverse events in hospitalized patients and contributes to the emergence and spread of resistant pathogens. Targeting effective interventions to improve antimicrobial use in the acute care setting requires understanding hospital prescribing practices.ObjectiveTo determine the prevalence of and describe the rationale for antimicrobial use in participating hospitals.Design, setting, and participantsOne-day prevalence surveys were conducted in acute care hospitals in 10 states between May and September 2011. Patients were randomly selected from each hospital's morning census on the survey date. Data collectors reviewed medical records retrospectively to gather data on antimicrobial drugs administered to patients on the survey date and the day prior to the survey date, including reasons for administration, infection sites treated, and whether treated infections began in community or health care settings.Main outcomes and measuresAntimicrobial use prevalence, defined as the number of patients receiving antimicrobial drugs at the time of the survey divided by the total number of surveyed patients.ResultsOf 11,282 patients in 183 hospitals, 5635 (49.9%; 95% CI, 49.0%-50.9%) were administered at least 1 antimicrobial drug; 77.5% (95% CI, 76.6%-78.3%) of antimicrobial drugs were used to treat infections, most commonly involving the lower respiratory tract, urinary tract, or skin and soft tissues, whereas 12.2% (95% CI, 11.5%-12.8%) were given for surgical and 5.9% (95% CI, 5.5%-6.4%) for medical prophylaxis. Of 7641 drugs to treat infections, the most common were parenteral vancomycin (1103, 14.4%; 95% CI, 13.7%-15.2%), ceftriaxone (825, 10.8%; 95% CI, 10.1%-11.5%), piperacillin-tazobactam (788, 10.3%; 95% CI, 9.6%-11.0%), and levofloxacin (694, 9.1%; 95% CI, 8.5%-9.7%). Most drugs administered to treat infections were given for community-onset infections (69.0%; 95% CI, 68.0%-70.1%) and to patients outside critical care units (81.6%; 95% CI, 80.4%-82.7%). The 4 most common treatment antimicrobial drugs overall were also the most common drugs used for both community-onset and health care facility-onset infections and for infections in patients in critical care and noncritical care locations.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cross-sectional evaluation of antimicrobial use in US hospitals, use of broad-spectrum antimicrobial drugs such as piperacillin-tazobactam and drugs such as vancomycin for resistant pathogens was common, including for treatment of community-onset infections and among patients outside critical care units. Further work is needed to understand the settings and indications for which reducing antimicrobial use can be most effectively and safely accomplished.

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.