Pharmacist-Driven Antibiotic Stewardship Program in Febrile Neutropenic Patients: A Single Site Prospective Study in Thailand.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Jantarathaneewat K
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8072986 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:INTRODUCTION:In the past decade, direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOAC) have been introduced to medical practice for several indications, with a wide range of dosing regimens. As both over- and under-dosing might lead to life-threatening events, development of methods promoting safe and effective utilization of these agents is imperative. The Hadassah Clinical Pharmacy team initiated a hospital-wide program, for monitoring and promoting safe and effective prescription of DOAC during hospitalization. This study describes the types of drug related problems addressed and the program's performance in terms of consultation rates and physician acceptance. METHODS:Electronic medical records throughout the hospital were screened for DOAC orders. All DOAC orders were assessed by a clinical pharmacist for potentially-inappropriate prescribing. When potentially-inappropriate prescribing or a drug-related problem was identified, the clinical pharmacist provided consultation on management options. In specific cases, additional guidance was provided by coagulation and pharmacology specialists. Data on patient characteristics, clinical pharmacist consultations, and physician response was retrospectively retrieved for the first six months of 2017. Characteristics of patients with and without consultations were compared, consultations were categorized by the recommended management of the drug related problem, and physician acceptance rates were evaluated by category. RESULTS:During the evaluated period, 585 patients with DOAC orders were identified. Patients were evenly distributed by gender, and age averaged 78?years. Most patients received apixaban (75%) followed by rivaroxaban (14%) and dabigatran (11%), and most (63%) received "reduced dose" regimens. Clinical pharmacists provided 258 consultations for 210 patients, regarding anticoagulation management, such that more than one in three patients on DOAC had potentially inappropriate prescribing or drug related problems. Consultations included alerts regarding potentially inappropriate DOAC doses and recommendations to increase (29%) or decrease (5%) the dose, potentially inappropriate concomitant antiplatelet agents (20%), need for DOAC level monitoring (23%), and alerts regarding other drug related problems (23%). More than 70% of recommendations were accepted by the attending physician. CONCLUSION:Due to the complexity of DOAC management, potentially-inappropriate prescribing and drug related problems are common. Multidisciplinary collaborative projects including review and consultation by clinical pharmacists are an effective method of improving management of patients on DOAC. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Retrospectively registered at clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03527615 .
| S-EPMC6357500 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo examine how individual steward characteristics (eg, steward role, sex, and specialized training) are associated with their views of antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP) implementation at their institution.DesignDescriptive survey from a mixed-methods study.SettingTwo large national healthcare systems; the Veterans' Health Administration (VA) (n = 134 hospitals) and Intermountain Healthcare (IHC; n = 20 hospitals).ParticipantsWe sent the survey to 329 antibiotic stewards serving in 154 hospitals; 152 were physicians and 177 were pharmacists. In total, 118 pharmacists and 64 physicians from 126 hospitals responded.MethodsThe survey was grounded in constructs of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, and it assessed stewards' views on the development and implementation of antibiotic stewardship programs (ASPs) at their institutions We then examined differences in stewards' views by demographic factors.ResultsRegardless of individual factors, stewards agreed that the ASP added value to their institution and was advantageous to patient care. Stewards also reported high levels of collegiality and self-efficacy. Stewards who had specialized training or those volunteered for the role were less likely to think that the ASP was implemented due to a mandate. Similarly volunteers and those with specialized training felt that they had authority in the antibiotic decisions made in their facility.ConclusionsGiven the importance of ASPs, it may be beneficial for healthcare institutions to recruit and train individuals with a true interest in stewardship.
| S-EPMC9495632 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCoronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a highly infectious disease that can be treated with antivirals in addition to other antimicrobials in cases of secondary or concomitant infections. This creates potential for antimicrobials misuse, which increases antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Pharmacists are known to undertake prominent roles in combatting AMR.AimThe aim of this review was to characterize pharmacist-driven interventions that have been performed in patients with COVID-19 globally and describe their impact on antimicrobial use.MethodWe followed the Joanna Briggs Institutes manual framework for scoping reviews in our study. Studies that reported antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) interventions performed by pharmacists in COVID-19 patients were included. Articles that did not report outcomes or did not mention pharmacists in the intervention were excluded. Restrictions included English-only articles from inception date until June 2022. Articles were searched from four databases.ResultsEleven publications were included in the review. The most common AMS intervention was pharmacist-driven interventions reported in 63.2% of all studies, followed by guideline development and application (26.3%), and medication supply coordination (10.5%), respectively. The outcomes of the interventions were difficult to compare but showed a reduction in antimicrobial use and prevention of adverse drug reactions with a relatively high acceptance rate from physicians.ConclusionPharmacists played an important role in performing AMS-related interventions in COVID-19 patients and helped in the fight against the worsening of AMR during the pandemic. The impact of pharmacist-driven AMS interventions in patients with COVID-19 seemed to be positive and improved outcomes related to antimicrobial use.
| S-EPMC10171144 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe 4th European Conference on Infections in Leukemia recommends early adaptation of empirical antibiotic therapy (EAT) for febrile neutropenia in stable patients.ObjectivesTo assess the efficacy of an antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) intervention promoting early de-escalation and discontinuation of EAT in high-risk neutropenic patients.MethodsThis before-after study was conducted in the hematology department of the University Hospital of Nice, France. The AMS intervention included the development of clinical decision support algorithms, a twice-weekly face-to-face review of all antibiotic prescriptions and monthly feedback on the intervention. The primary endpoint was overall antibiotic consumption during hospital stay, expressed as days of therapy (DOT).ResultsA total of 113 admissions were included: 56 during the pre-intervention period and 57 during the intervention period. Induction chemotherapy and conditioning for allogeneic stem cell transplantation were the most frequent reasons for admission. In the intervention period, there was a significant decrease in overall antibiotic consumption (median DOT 20 vs. 28 days, p = 0.006), carbapenem consumption (median DOT 5.5 vs. 9 days, p = 0.017) and anti-resistant Gram-positive agents consumption (median DOT 8 vs. 11.5 days, p = 0.017). We found no statistical difference in the rates of intensive care unit admission (9% in each period) and 30-day mortality (5% vs. 0%, p = 0.243). Compliance with de-escalation and discontinuation strategies was significantly higher in the intervention period (77% vs. 8%, p < 0.001).ConclusionA multifaceted AMS intervention led to high compliance with early de-escalation and discontinuation of EAT and lower overall antibiotic consumption, without negatively affecting clinical outcomes.
| S-EPMC10795280 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PURPOSE:Febrile neutropenia has a significant clinical and economic impact on cancer patients. This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of different current empiric antibiotic treatments. METHODS:A decision analytic model was constructed to compare the use of cefepime, meropenem, imipenem/cilastatin, and piperacillin/tazobactam for treatment of high-risk patients. The analysis was performed from the perspective of U.S.-based hospitals. The time horizon was defined to be a single febrile neutropenia episode. Cost-effectiveness was determined by calculating costs and deaths averted. Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves for various willingness-to-pay thresholds (WTP), were used to address the uncertainty in cost-effectiveness. RESULTS:The base-case analysis results showed that treatments were equally effective but differed mainly in their cost. In increasing order: treatment with imipenem/cilastatin cost $52,647, cefepime $57,270, piperacillin/tazobactam $57,277, and meropenem $63,778. In the probabilistic analysis, mean costs were $52,554 (CI: $52,242-$52,866) for imipenem/cilastatin, $57,272 (CI: $56,951-$57,593) for cefepime, $57,294 (CI: $56,978-$57,611) for piperacillin/tazobactam, and $63,690 (CI: $63,370-$64,009) for meropenem. Furthermore, with a WTP set at $0 to $50,000, imipenem/cilastatin was cost-effective in 66.2% to 66.3% of simulations compared to all other high-risk options. DISCUSSION:Imipenem/cilastatin is a cost-effective strategy and results in considerable health care cost-savings at various WTP thresholds. Cost-effectiveness analyses can be used to differentiate the treatments of febrile neutropenia in high-risk patients.
| S-EPMC7254453 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionAntibiotic stewardship programs (ASP) improve appropriate antibiotic use. Data are limited on the clinical benefit of ASPs in children's hospitals. This study's objective was to determine the impact of an ASP on length of stay (LOS) and readmission rate among patients admitted to children's hospitals.MethodsData from a prospective-audit-with-feedback ASP were used to examine the ASP review characteristics, including antibiotic(s) prescribed, clinical indication, recommendations made by the ASP, and agreement with recommendations. Propensity score analysis was utilized to determine the impact of the ASP on LOS and 30-day readmission based on whether the patient received an ASP recommendation and if the clinician agreed with recommendations. Patients were stratified on if they had a complex chronic condition status (CCC) and their service line, medical or surgical.ResultsOf the 8038 reviews included, 1362 (16.9%) resulted in a recommendation that was agreed with in 1116 (81%) cases. Propensity score analysis demonstrated a significantly longer LOS for the non-CCC medicine group who received an ASP recommendation (80.9 vs. 67.6 h, p < 0.001). However, for CCC medicine patients that agreed with the ASP recommendation, a clinically relevant decrease in LOS (158.1 vs. 180.3 h, p = 0.095) was observed. The 30-day readmission rate was significantly greater in CCC medicine patients when comparing those who did not receive a recommendation versus those who did receive a recommendation (7.3% vs 4.2%, respectively; p = 0.005).ConclusionChildren without a CCC who received an ASP recommendation had a longer length of stay. For children with CCCs, the ASP appeared to decrease LOS and significantly reduce 30-day readmission rates. Overall, this study demonstrate that ASPs offer meaningful clinical benefit justifying resource allocation needed to develop and maintain ASP programs.
| S-EPMC5336414 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Antibiotic resistance is increasing worldwide. The implementation of antibiotic stewardship programmes (ASPs) is of utmost importance to optimize antibiotic use in order to prevent resistance development without harming patients. The emergency department (ED), cornerstone between hospital and community, represents a crucial setting for addressing ASP implementation; however, evidence data on ASP in ED are poor. In this study, a 4-year, non-restrictive, multi-faceted ASP was implemented in a general ED with the aim to evaluate its impact on antibiotic use and costs. Secondly, the study focused on assessing the impact on length of hospital stay (LOS), Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) incidence rate, and mortality in the patients' group admitted from ED to medical wards. The ASP implementation was associated with a reduction of antibiotic use and costs. A mild but sustained LOS decrease in all medical wards and a significant downward trend of CDI incidence rate were observed, while mortality did not significantly change. In conclusion, the implementation of our ED-based ASP has demonstrated to be feasible and safe and might clinically benefit the hospital admitted patients' group. Further research is needed to identify the most suitable ASP design for ED and the key outcome measures to reliably assess its effectiveness.
| S-EPMC7235006 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionGiven the increasing importance of antibiotic stewardship, an understanding of the basic tenets of antibiotic prescribing is critical for all medical students. This engaged learning module focuses on terminology and foundational concepts in antibiotic stewardship while assisting learners with application in their early clinical practice.MethodsThis module was developed for third-year internal medicine clerkship students at the University of South Dakota, Sanford School of Medicine. The students participated in an introductory discussion of the harms of antibiotic overuse in a large-group format, followed by small-group work to develop a miniature antibiotic stewardship program. Upon completion of the small-group portion, the large group reconvened to share antibiotic stewardship strategies and to complete the session with additional training regarding individual provider and system-level antibiotic stewardship strategies.ResultsApproximately 150 students have participated in this module. Through use of the module, students have been highly engaged in identifying antibiotic stewardship interventions in their early practice and creating potential solutions. Themes identified during analysis of one-minute paper responses demonstrated student learning around the rationale for antibiotic stewardship programs, implementation strategies, and patient education.DiscussionThis module was primarily developed for medical students, but it could easily be adapted for use with learners of varying levels. Additionally, it could be implemented as an interprofessional exercise to leverage the expertise of trainees in pharmacy and nursing.
| S-EPMC6342413 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAntibiotic resistance is a global threat to patient safety and care. In response, hospitals start antibiotic stewardship programs to optimise antibiotic use. Expert-based guidelines recommend strategies to implement such programs, but local implementations may differ per hospital. Earlier published assessments determine maturity of antibiotic stewardship programs based on expert-based structure indicators, but they disregard that there may be valid deviations from these expert-based programs.AimTo analyse the progress and barriers of local implementations of antibiotic stewardship programs with stakeholders in nine Dutch hospitals and to develop a toolkit that guides implementing local antibiotic stewardship programs.MethodsAn online questionnaire based on published guidelines and recommendations, conducted with seven clinical microbiologists, seven infectious disease physicians and five clinical pharmacists at nine Dutch hospitals.ResultsResults show local differences in antibiotic stewardship programs and the uptake of interventions in hospitals. Antibiotic guidelines and antibiotic teams are the most extensively implemented interventions. Education, decision support and audit-feedback are deemed important interventions and they are either piloted in implementations at academic hospitals or in preparation for application in non-academic hospitals. Other interventions that are recommended in guidelines - benchmarking, restriction and antibiotic formulary - appear to have a lower priority. Automatic stop-order, pre-authorization, automatic substitution, antibiotic cycling are not deemed to be worthwhile according to respondents.ConclusionThere are extensive local differences in the implementation of antibiotic stewardship interventions. These differences suggest a need to further explore the rationale behind the choice of interventions in antibiotic stewardship programs. Rather than reporting this rationale, this study reports where rationale can play a key role in the implementation of antibiotic stewardship programs. A one-size-fits-all solution is unfeasible as there may be barriers or valid reasons for local experts to deviate from expert-based guidelines. Local experts can be supported with a toolkit containing advice based on possible barriers and considerations. These parameters can be used to customise an implementation of antibiotic stewardship programs to local needs (while retaining its expert-based foundation).
| S-EPMC4228167 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background:Despite the high prevalence of patient-reported antibiotic allergy (so-called antibiotic allergy labels [AALs]) and their impact on antibiotic prescribing, incorporation of antibiotic allergy testing (AAT) into antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) programs (AAT-AMS) is not widespread. We aimed to evaluate the impact of an AAT-AMS program on AAL prevalence, antibiotic usage, and appropriateness of prescribing. Methods:AAT-AMS was implemented at two large Australian hospitals during a 14-month period beginning May 2015. Baseline demographics, AAL history, age-adjusted Charlson comorbidity index, infection history, and antibiotic usage for 12 months prior to testing (pre-AAT-AMS) and 3 months following testing (post-AAT-AMS) were recorded for each participant. Study outcomes included the proportion of patients who were "de-labeled" of their AAL, spectrum of antibiotic courses pre- and post-AAT-AMS, and antibiotic appropriateness (using standard definitions). Results:From the 118 antibiotic allergy-tested patients, 226 AALs were reported (mean, 1.91/patient), with 53.6% involving 1 or more penicillin class drug. AAT-AMS allowed AAL de-labeling in 98 (83%) patients-56% (55/98) with all AALs removed. Post-AAT, prescribing of narrow-spectrum penicillins was more likely (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.81, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.45-5.42), as was narrow-spectrum β-lactams (aOR, 3.54; 95% CI, 1.98-6.33), and appropriate antibiotics (aOR, 12.27; 95% CI, 5.00-30.09); and less likely for restricted antibiotics (aOR, 0.16; 95% CI, .09-.29), after adjusting for indication, Charlson comorbidity index, and care setting. Conclusions:An integrated AAT-AMS program was effective in both de-labeling of AALs and promotion of improved antibiotic usage and appropriateness, supporting the routine incorporation of AAT into AMS programs.
| S-EPMC5849110 | biostudies-literature