Dataset Information

Comparative analysis of Australian hospital antimicrobial utilization, using the WHO AWaRe classification system and the adapted Australian Priority Antimicrobial List (PAL).

ABSTRACT:

Background

In 2020 the Australian Priority Antibacterial List (PAL) was developed to support national surveillance of antibacterial usage.

Objectives

To compare the WHO AwaRe classification system with the Australian PAL to analyse antibacterial utilization in Australian acute care hospitals.

Methods

Monthly antibacterial usage rates (defined daily dose per 1000 occupied bed days) were calculated using pharmacy dispensing records together with patient occupancy data for all acute care hospitals contributing to the National Antimicrobial Utilisation Surveillance Program for 2015-19. Annual usage rates as a proportion were determined using the WHO AWaRe and Australian PAL categorization systems.

Results

In 2019, 70.0% of total-hospital aggregate antibacterial use in Australian acute-care hospitals fell into the WHO Access category, with 29.4% of usage in Watch and 0.6% in the Reserve category. Analysis using the PAL classification system showed 40.1% of hospital usage fell into the Access category, 55.6% in Curb and 3.8% in the Contain categories. On average, cefazolin usage comprised 12.5% of acute hospital usage.

Conclusions

Cefazolin, a first-line agent for surgical prophylaxis in Australia, was identified as a key antibacterial driving the differing results seen between the two classification systems. Data on the proportions of day surgery relative to inpatient surgical cases would assist the accuracy of benchmarking usage between hospitals using the PAL categorization system. The use of a targeted, nationally approved prioritized classification system can provide a focus for antimicrobial stewardship at a national level, however a clear understanding of the consumption metric used, as well as its limitations, are required for interpretation.

SUBMITTER: Hillock NT

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8210107 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe antimicrobial resistance of clinical, environmental and control strains of the WHO "Priority 1: Critical group" organisms, Acinetobacter baumannii, Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae and Pseudomonas aeruginosa to various classes of antibiotics, colistin and surfactin (biosurfactant) was determined.MethodsAcinetobacter baumannii was isolated from environmental samples and antibiotic resistance profiling was performed to classify the test organisms [A. baumannii (n =?6), P. aeruginosa (n =?5), E. coli (n =?7) and K. pneumoniae (n =?7)] as multidrug resistant (MDR) or extreme drug resistant (XDR). All the bacterial isolates (n =?25) were screened for colistin resistance and the mobilised colistin resistance (mcr) genes. Biosurfactants produced by Bacillus amyloliquefaciens ST34 were solvent extracted and characterised using ultra-performance liquid chromatography (UPLC) coupled to electrospray ionisation mass spectrometry (ESI-MS). The susceptibility of strains, exhibiting antibiotic and colistin resistance, to the crude surfactin extract (cell-free supernatant) was then determined.ResultsAntibiotic resistance profiling classified four A. baumannii (67%), one K. pneumoniae (15%) and one P. aeruginosa (20%) isolate as XDR, with one E. coli (15%) and three K. pneumoniae (43%) strains classified as MDR. Many of the isolates [A. baumannii (25%), E. coli (80%), K. pneumoniae (100%) and P. aeruginosa (100%)] exhibited colistin resistance [minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs)???4?mg/L]; however, only one E. coli strain isolated from a clinical environment harboured the mcr-1 gene. UPLC-MS analysis then indicated that the B. amyloliquefaciens ST34 produced C13-16 surfactin analogues, which were identified as Srf1 to Srf5. The crude surfactin extract (10.00?mg/mL) retained antimicrobial activity (100%) against the MDR, XDR and colistin resistant A. baumannii, P. aeruginosa, E. coli and K. pneumoniae strains.ConclusionClinical, environmental and control strains of A. baumannii, P. aeruginosa, E. coli and K. pneumoniae exhibiting MDR and XDR profiles and colistin resistance, were susceptible to surfactin analogues, confirming that this lipopeptide shows promise for application in clinical settings.

Project description:ObjectivesDespite escalating antimicrobial resistance (AMR), implementing effective antimicrobial optimisation within healthcare settings has been hampered by institutional impediments. This study sought to examine, from a hospital management and governance perspective, why healthcare providers may find it challenging to enact changes needed to address rising AMR.DesignSemistructured qualitative interviews around their experiences of antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) and responsiveness to the requirement for optimisation. Data were analysed using the framework approach.SettingTwo metropolitan tertiary-referral hospitals in Australia.ParticipantsTwenty hospital managers and executives from the organisational level of department head and above, spanning a range of professional backgrounds and in both clinical and non-clinical roles, and different professional streams were represented.ResultsThematic analysis demonstrated three key domains which managers and executives describe, and which might function to delimit institutional responsiveness to present and future AMR solutions. First, the primacy of 'political' priorities. AMR was perceived as a secondary priority, overshadowed by political priorities determined beyond the hospital by state health departments/ministries and election cycles. Second, the limits of accreditation as a mechanism for change. Hospital accreditation processes and regulatory structures were not sufficient to induce efficacious AMS. Third, a culture of acute problem 'solving' rather than future proofing. A culture of reactivity was described across government and healthcare institutions, precluding longer term objectives, like addressing the AMR crisis.ConclusionThere are dynamics between political and health service institutions, as well as enduring governance norms, that may significantly shape capacity to enact AMS and respond to AMR. Until these issues are addressed, and the field moves beyond individual behaviour modification models, antimicrobial misuse will likely continue, and stewardship is likely to have a limited impact.

Project description:Multidisciplinary antimicrobial utilization teams (AUTs) have been proposed as a mechanism for improving antimicrobial use, but data on their efficacy remain limited.To determine the impact of an AUT on antimicrobial use at a teaching hospital.Randomized controlled intervention trial.A 953-bed, public, university-affiliated, urban teaching hospital.Patients who were given selected antimicrobial agents (piperacillin-tazobactam, levofloxacin, or vancomycin) by internal medicine ward teams.Twelve internal medicine teams were randomly assigned monthly: 6 teams to an intervention group (academic detailing by the AUT) and 6 teams to a control group that was given indication-based guidelines for prescription of broad-spectrum antimicrobials (standard of care), during a 10-month study period.Proportion of appropriate empirical, definitive (therapeutic), and end (overall) antimicrobial usage.A total of 784 new prescriptions of piperacillin-tazobactam, levofloxacin, and vancomycin were reviewed. The proportion of antimicrobial prescriptions written by the intervention teams that was considered to be appropriate was significantly higher than the proportion of antimicrobial prescriptions written by the control teams that was considered to be appropriate: 82% versus 73% for empirical (risk ratio [RR], 1.14; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-1.24), 82% versus 43% for definitive (RR, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.53-2.33), and 94% versus 70% for end antimicrobial usage (RR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.25-1.43). In multivariate analysis, teams that received feedback from the AUT alone (adjusted RR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.27-1.48) or from both the AUT and the infectious diseases consultation service (adjusted RR, 2.28; 95% CI, 1.64-3.19) were significantly more likely to prescribe end antimicrobial usage appropriately, compared with control teams.A multidisciplinary AUT that provides feedback to prescribing physicians was an effective method in improving antimicrobial use. Trial registration. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00552838.