Dataset Information

Implementation of a Pharmacist-Led Culture and Susceptibility Review System in Urgent Care and Outpatient Settings

ABSTRACT:

Background

Increasing prevalence of antibiotic resistance is an urgent public health threat. The purpose of this project is to implement a pharmacist-managed culture review service to decrease and prevent inappropriate use of antibiotics. This service will intervene in cases of mismatched antibiotic–bacteria combinations to decrease health care provider (HCP) and nursing interruptions, improve patient outcomes, and enhance prescribing practices to reduce occurrence of antibiotic resistance.

Observations

Patients requiring changes in antibiotic therapy after culture and susceptibility results were identified through the electronic health record. After results were returned, pharmacists assessed the antibiotic for appropriateness. If the isolated organism was not susceptible to the empiric antibiotic, the pharmacist adjusted the regimen, counseled the patient, documented the intervention electronically, and notified the HCP via an electronic note. Follow-up phone calls assessed for adverse effects and answered patient questions. Pharmacists could change antibiotic therapy without contacting HCPs because of an antimicrobial stewardship care coordination agreement between HCPs and pharmacists. Previously, HCPs were responsible for evaluating culture and susceptibility results as well as adjusting antimicrobial regimens. After implementing this project, 10 interventions were made out of 320 patients from August 2019 to February 2020.

Conclusions

Appropriateness of antibiotic therapy through antimicrobial stewardship could help combat the significant public health issue of antibiotic resistance.

SUBMITTER: Pierce K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8562898 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Few studies have analyzed community hospital-based parenteral anti-infective therapy (CohPAT). We aimed to assess the clinical impact of a pharmacist-led implementation of a clinical practice guideline (CPG) for CohPAT, and to determine the pharmacist's role in CohPAT medication management. The prospective-period patients (post-implementation group) were compared with the historical control-period patients (pre-implementation group) for receiving a continuous antimicrobial parenteral injection. A CPG was used for laboratory testing for efficacy and safety, the monitoring of adverse drug events during admission, microbiology results coordination, and dosage adjustment. For any antimicrobial drug-related problems, the pharmacist consulted with the clinicians. Over 14 months, 50 participants were included in each group. In the pre-implementation period, 7 (14%) and 4 (8%) out of 50 patients received an inappropriate dosage and nonlaboratory monitoring for dose adjustment, respectively. The patients received the proper dosage of antimicrobial agents, which increased significantly from 78% pre- to 100% post-implementation (p = 0.000). The pharmacist's interventions during the prospective-period were completely accepted by the clinicians, and significantly greater laboratory monitoring complying with CPG was given to the postimplementation group than the pre-implementation group (100% vs. 60%; p = 0.000). Significantly less patients with unfavorable outcomes (failure or in-hospital mortality) were observed in the post-implementation than in the pre-implementation (6% vs. 26%; p = 0.006) group. For the logistic regression analysis, lower respiratory infection (adjusted OR, aOR 3.68; 95%CI 1.13-12.06) and the post-implementation period (aOR 0.21; 95%CI 0.06-0.83) were significant risk factors that were associated with unfavorable outcomes. Given the better clinical outcomes and the improved quality of septic patient care observed after implementation, pharmacist-led implementation should be adopted in healthcare settings.

Project description:BackgroundUrgent and emergency care (UEC) settings provide an opportunity to prevent ill-health and promote healthy lifestyles with potential to screen and deliver interventions to under-served, at-risk populations. The aim of this study was to synthesise and summarise the evidence on the effectiveness and implementation of interventions for health promotion in UEC settings.MethodsPubMed and Embase (OVID) databases were used to search for studies published in English between January 2010 and January 2023. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that examined the effectiveness or implementation of face-to-face health promotion interventions for lifestyle behaviours delivered in UEC settings were eligible. Extracted data were synthesised and qualitatively summarised by lifestyle behaviour. Reviews were quality assessed using AMSTAR 2.ResultsEighteen reviews met the inclusion criteria; all included studies were conducted in emergency departments or trauma units. We identified 15 reviews on alcohol interventions (13 on effectiveness; 2 on implementation) and 3 on smoking interventions (effectiveness). There were no reviews of intervention studies targeting physical activity or diet and nutrition. There was heterogeneity across studies for study design, target populations, intervention design and content, comparator/control groups and outcomes assessed. The effectiveness of alcohol and smoking interventions in UEC settings varied but some reviews provided evidence of a significant decrease in alcohol consumption, alcohol-related outcomes and smoking in intervention groups, particularly in the short-term and in specific population groups. Research has focused on 'brief' interventions as part of screening, brief intervention and referral to treatment (SBIRT) approaches. Interventions are delivered by a wide range of staff with substantial variation in design. Alcohol brief interventions appear to be acceptable to UEC patients but clinicians face barriers in delivering them.ConclusionsUEC settings have been under-researched and appear to be under-utilised for delivering health promotion activities, except for alcohol prevention. Review level evidence suggests alcohol and smoking interventions are warranted in some population groups. However, further research is needed to determine the optimal intervention design, content and delivery mode for lifestyle behaviours which are suitable for implementation in UEC settings and promote long-term intervention effectiveness. Changes in clinical practice may be needed, including increased training, integration into service delivery and supportive policy, to facilitate the implementation of SBIRT for lifestyle behaviours. Interventions may need to be delivered in the wider UEC system such as urgent care centres, minor injury units and walk-in centres, in addition to emergency departments and trauma units, to support and increase health promotion activities in UEC settings.

Project description:BackgroundA cluster randomised controlled trial (cRCT) performed from July 2018 to March 2019 demonstrated the clinical impact of a community pharmacist delivered minor ailment service (MAS) compared with usual pharmacist care (UC). MAS consisted of a technology-based face-to-face consultation delivered by trained community pharmacists. The consultation was guided by clinical pathways for assessment and management, and communication systems, collaboratively agreed with general practitioners. MAS pharmacists were trained and provided monthly practice support by a practice change facilitator. The objective of this study was to assess the cost utility of MAS, compared to UC.MethodsParticipants recruited were adult patients with symptoms suggestive of a minor ailment condition, from community pharmacies located in Western Sydney. Patients received MAS (intervention) or UC (control) and were followed-up by telephone 14-days following consultation with the pharmacist. A cost utility analysis was conducted alongside the cRCT. Transition probabilities and costs were directly derived from cRCT study data. Utility values were not available from the cRCT, hence we relied on utility values reported in the published literature which were used to calculate quality adjusted life years (QALYs), using the area under the curve method. A decision tree model was used to capture the decision problem, considering a societal perspective and a 14-day time horizon. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses assessed robustness and uncertainty of results, respectively.ResultsPatients (n = 894) were recruited from 30 pharmacies and 82% (n = 732) responded to follow-up. On average, MAS was more costly but also more effective (in terms of symptom resolution and QALY gains) compared to UC. MAS patients (n = 524) gained an additional 0.003 QALYs at an incremental cost of $7.14 (Australian dollars), compared to UC (n = 370) which resulted in an ICER of $2277 (95% CI $681.49-3811.22) per QALY.ConclusionEconomic findings suggest that implementation of MAS within the Australian context is cost effective.Trial registration Registered with Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) and allocated the ACTRN: ACTRN12618000286246. Registered on 23 February 2018.

Project description:Importance:Urgent care (UC) centers are a growing option to address children's acute care needs, which may cause unanticipated changes in health care use. Objectives:To identify factors associated with high UC reliance among children enrolled in Medicaid and examine the association between UC reliance and outpatient health care use. Design, Setting, and Participants:A retrospective cohort study used deidentified data on 4?133?238 children from the Marketscan Medicaid multistate claims database to calculate UC reliance and outpatient health care use. Children were younger than 19 years, with 11 months or more of continuous Medicaid enrollment and 1 or more UC, emergency department (ED), primary care provider (PCP; physician, advanced practice nurse, or physician assistant; well-child care [WCC] or non-WCC), or specialist outpatient visit during the 2017 calendar year. Statistical analysis was conducted from November 11 to 26, 2019. Exposures:Urgent care, ED, PCP (WCC and non-WCC), and specialist visits based on coded location of services. Main Outcomes and Measures:Urgent care reliance, calculated by the number of UC visits divided by the sum of total outpatient (UC, ED, PCP, and specialist) visits. High UC reliance was defined as UC visits totaling more than 33% of all outpatient visits. Results:Of 4?133?238 children in the study, 2?090?278 (50.6%) were male, with a median age of 9 years (interquartile range, 4-13 years). A total of 223?239 children (5.4%) had high UC reliance. Children 6 to 12 years of age were more likely to have high UC reliance compared with children 13 to 18 years of age (adjusted odds ratio, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.06-1.09). Compared with white children, black children (adjusted odds ratio, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.81-0.82) and Hispanic children (adjusted odds ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.60-0.61) were less likely to have high UC reliance. Adjusted for age, sex, race/ethnicity, and presence of chronic or complex conditions, children with high UC reliance had significantly fewer PCP encounters (WCC: adjusted rate ratio, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.60-0.61; and non-WCC: adjusted rate ratio, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.41-0.41), specialist encounters (adjusted rate ratio, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.31-0.31), and ED encounters (adjusted rate ratio, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.67-0.68) than children with low UC reliance. Conclusions and Relevance:High UC reliance occurred more often in healthy, nonminority, school-aged children and was associated with lower health care use across other outpatient settings. There may be an opportunity in certain populations to ensure that UC reliance does not disrupt the medical home model.

Project description:ObjectiveTo examine a wide range of study designs and outcomes to estimate the extent to which interventions in outpatient perinatal care settings are associated with an increase in the uptake of depression care.Data sourcesPubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Scopus (EMBASE) were searched for studies published between 1999 and 2014 that evaluated mental health care use after screening for depression in perinatal care settings.Methods of study selectionInclusion criteria were: 1) English language; 2) pregnant and postpartum women who screened positive for depression; 3) exposure (validated depression screening in outpatient perinatal care setting); and, 4) outcome (mental health care use). Searches yielded 392 articles, 42 met criteria for full-text review, and 17 met inclusion criteria. Study quality was assessed using a modified Downs and Black scale.Tabulation, integration, and resultsArticles were independently reviewed by two abstractors and consensus reached. Study design, intervention components, and mental health care use were defined and categorized. Seventeen articles representing a range of study designs, including one randomized controlled trial and one cluster randomized controlled trial, were included. The average quality rating was 61% (31.0-90.0%). When no intervention was in place, an average of 22% (13.8-33.0%) of women who screened positive for depression had at least one mental health visit. The average rate of mental health care use was associated with a doubling of this rate with patient engagement strategies (44%, 29.0-90.0%), on-site assessments (49%, 25.2-90.0%), and perinatal care provider training (54%, 1.0-90.0%). High rates of mental health care use (81%, 72.0-90.0%) were associated with implementation of additional interventions, including resource provision to women, perinatal care provider training, on-site assessment, and access to mental health consultation for perinatal care providers.ConclusionScreening alone was associated with 22% mental health care use among women who screened positive for depression; however, implementation of additional interventions was associated with a two to fourfold increased use of mental health care. Although definitive studies are still needed, screening done in conjunction with interventions that target patient, health care provider, and practice-level barriers is associated with increased improved rates of depression detection, assessment, referral, and treatment in perinatal care settings.