Dataset Information

Reducing Antimicrobial Use in an Academic Pediatric Institution: Evaluation of the Effectiveness of a Prospective Audit With Real-Time Feedback.

ABSTRACT: Introduction:Antimicrobial use is decreasing across freestanding children's hospitals, predominantly in institutions with antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) in place. A highly effective ASP should effect a greater decrease in use than predicted by existing trends. Antimicrobial stewardship programs depend on clinician adherence to program recommendations, but little is known about factors associated with adherence. Methods:Parenteral antimicrobial-use data for our institution and 43 additional freestanding children's hospitals were obtained and normalized for patient census. Segmental linear regression was used to compare rates of change of parenteral antimicrobial use before and after ASP implementation. Time-series models were developed to predict use in the absence of intervention. The odds of adherence to ASP recommendations were determined based on provider characteristics and recommendation type. Results:In the 38 months before ASP implementation, parenteral antimicrobial use was decreasing at our hospital by 3.7%/year, similar to the 3.4%/year found across children's hospitals. The rate of change after implementation of the ASP at our hospital was 11.1%/year, compared to 5.6%/year for other hospitals over the same period. Of 643 interventions, teams adhered with recommendations in 495 cases (77.0%). According to adjusted analysis, primary service was not associated with adherence (P = .356). There was an association between adherence and the role of the clinician receiving a recommendation (P = .009) and the recommendation type (P = .009). Conclusions:Understanding factors associated with adherence to ASP recommendations can help those who administer such programs to strategize interventions for maximizing efficacy. Our findings reveal the value of a formal ASP in reducing use when controlling for secular trends.

SUBMITTER: Willis ZI

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5907874 | biostudies-other | 2017 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Reducing Antimicrobial Use in an Academic Pediatric Institution: Evaluation of the Effectiveness of a Prospective Audit With Real-Time Feedback.

Willis Zachary I ZI Gillon Jessica J Xu Meng M Slaughter James C JC Di Pentima M Cecilia MC

Journal of the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society 20171101 4

<h4>Introduction</h4>Antimicrobial use is decreasing across freestanding children's hospitals, predominantly in institutions with antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) in place. A highly effective ASP should effect a greater decrease in use than predicted by existing trends. Antimicrobial stewardship programs depend on clinician adherence to program recommendations, but little is known about factors associated with adherence.<h4>Methods</h4>Parenteral antimicrobial-use data for our instituti ...[more]

PMID: 28339590

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesAsthma is a heterogenous condition with significant diagnostic complexity, including variations in symptoms and temporal criteria. The disease can be difficult for clinicians to diagnose accurately. Properly identifying asthma patients from the electronic health record is consequently challenging as current algorithms (computable phenotypes) rely on diagnostic codes (e.g., International Classification of Disease, ICD) in addition to other criteria (e.g., inhaler medications)-but presume an accurate diagnosis. As such, there is no universally accepted or rigorously tested computable phenotype for asthma.MethodsWe compared two established asthma computable phenotypes: the Chicago Area Patient-Outcomes Research Network (CAPriCORN) and Phenotype KnowledgeBase (PheKB). We established a large-scale, consensus gold standard (n = 1,365) from the University of California, Los Angeles Health System's clinical data warehouse for patients 5 to 17 years old. Results were manually reviewed and predictive performance (positive predictive value [PPV], sensitivity/specificity, F1-score) determined. We then examined the classification errors to gain insight for future algorithm optimizations.ResultsAs applied to our final cohort of 1,365 expert-defined gold standard patients, the CAPriCORN algorithms performed with a balanced PPV = 95.8% (95% CI: 94.4-97.2%), sensitivity = 85.7% (95% CI: 83.9-87.5%), and harmonized F1 = 90.4% (95% CI: 89.2-91.7%). The PheKB algorithm was performed with a balanced PPV = 83.1% (95% CI: 80.5-85.7%), sensitivity = 69.4% (95% CI: 66.3-72.5%), and F1 = 75.4% (95% CI: 73.1-77.8%). Four categories of errors were identified related to method limitations, disease definition, human error, and design implementation.ConclusionThe performance of the CAPriCORN and PheKB algorithms was lower than previously reported as applied to pediatric data (PPV = 97.7 and 96%, respectively). There is room to improve the performance of current methods, including targeted use of natural language processing and clinical feature engineering.

Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has been associated with increased antimicrobial use despite low rates of bacterial co-infection. Prospective audit and feedback is recommended to optimise antibiotic prescribing, but high-quality evidence supporting its use for COVID-19 is absent. We aimed to study the efficacy and safety of prospective audit and feedback in patients admitted to hospital for the treatment of COVID-19.MethodsCOVASP was a prospective, pragmatic, non-inferiority, small-unit, cluster-randomised trial comparing prospective audit and feedback plus standard of care with standard of care alone in adults admitted to three hospitals in Edmonton, AB, Canada, with COVID-19 pneumonia. All patients aged at least 18 years who were admitted from the community to a designated study bed with microbiologically confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in the preceding 14 days were included if they had an oxygen saturation of 94% or lower on room air, required supplemental oxygen, or had chest-imaging findings compatible with COVID-19 pneumonia. Patients were excluded if they were transferred in from another acute care centre, enrolled in another clinical trial that involved antibiotic therapy, expected to progress to palliative care or death within 48 h of hospital admission, or managed by any member of the research team within 30 days of enrolment. COVID-19 unit and critical care unit beds were stratified and randomly assigned (1:1) to the prospective audit and feedback plus standard of care group or the standard of care group. Patients were masked to their bed assignment but the attending physician and study team were not. The primary outcome was clinical status on postadmission day 15, measured using a seven-point ordinal scale. We used a non-inferiority margin of 0·5. Analysis was by intention to treat. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04896866, and is now closed.FindingsBetween March 1 and Oct 29, 2021, 1411 patients were screened and 886 were enrolled: 457 into the prospective audit and feedback plus standard of care group, of whom 429 completed the study, and 429 into the standard of care group, of whom 404 completed the study. Baseline characteristics were similar for both groups, with an overall mean age of 56·7 years (SD 17·3) and a median baseline ordinal scale of 4·0 (IQR 4·0-5·0). 301 audit and feedback events were recorded in the intervention group and 215 recommendations were made, of which 181 (84%) were accepted. Despite lower antibiotic use in the intervention group than in the control group (length of therapy 364·9 vs 384·2 days per 1000 patient days), clinical status at postadmission day 15 was non-inferior (median ordinal score 2·0 [IQR 2·0-3·0] vs 2·0 [IQR 2·0-4·0]; p=0·37, Mann-Whitney U test). Neutropenia was uncommon in both the intervention group (13 [3%] of 420 patients) and the control group (20 [5%] of 396 patients), and acute kidney injury occurred at a similar rate in both groups (74 [18%] of 421 patients in the intervention group and 76 [19%] of 399 patients in the control group). No intervention-related deaths were recorded.InterpretationThis cluster-randomised clinical trial shows that prospective audit and feedback is safe and effective in optimising and reducing antibiotic use in adults admitted to hospital with COVID-19. Despite many competing priorities during the COVID-19 pandemic, antimicrobial stewardship should remain a priority to mitigate the overuse of antibiotics in this population.FundingNone.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Prior authorization, audit and feedback, and pay for performance are the three core "active" strategies of antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP), yet little is known about the individual or combined benefits of such programs, particularly in a pediatric setting. OBJECTIVES:The aim of this study was to compare these core ASP strategies and determine the incremental effect of financially punished audit and feedback. METHODS:During the journey to the Joint Commission International accreditation, a tertiary pediatric medical center performed two different hospital-wide stewardship interventions in succession. The first stage without formalized ASPs served as pre-intervention period, January 2011 to April 2011. The ASP used prior authorization alone during the first-intervention period, May 2011 to September 2011. In October 2011, financially punished audit and feedback was introduced, marking the start of the second-intervention period, October 2011 to November 2012. We compared the differences of the change in monthly average use of antibiotics and expenditure on antibiotics before and after the ASP changes by using interrupted time series via dynamic regression. The main end points included the proportions of antibiotic prescriptions and expenditure on antibacterial relative to all medications. RESULTS:Before the second-intervention period, neither the proportion of antibiotic prescriptions nor the proportion of expenditure on antibiotics declined significantly in both ambulatory and inpatient settings. However, after the introduction of financially punished audit and feedback, the proportion of both antibiotic prescriptions (??=?-6.269, P?<?0.001, and reduction?=?59.4% for outpatients; ??=?-1.235, P?<?0.001, and reduction?=?19.8% for inpatients) and expenditure on antibiotics (??=?-7.777, P?<?0.001, and reduction?=?46.7% for outpatients; ??=?-4.933, P?=?0.001, and reduction?=?16.3% for inpatients) dropped immediately. CONCLUSION:The combination of more than one core strategies (prior authorization, audit and feedback, and pay for performance) will be more effective than one strategy alone.

Project description:BackgroundDespite a strong evidence base and clinical guidelines specifically recommending against prolonged post-procedural antimicrobial use, studies indicate that the practice is common following cardiac device procedures. Formative evaluations conducted by the study team suggest that inappropriate antimicrobial use may be driven by information silos that drive provider belief that antimicrobials are not harmful, in part due to lack of complete feedback about all types of clinical outcomes. De-implementation is recognized as an important area of research that can lead to reductions in unnecessary, wasteful, or harmful practices, such as excess antimicrobial use following cardiac device procedures; however, investigations into strategies that lead to successful de-implementation are limited. The overarching hypothesis to be tested in this trial is that a bundle of implementation strategies that includes audit and feedback about direct patient harms caused by inappropriate prescribing can lead to successful de-implementation of guideline-discordant care.MethodsWe propose a hybrid type III effectiveness-implementation stepped-wedge intervention trial at three high-volume, high-complexity VA medical centers. The main study intervention (an informatics-based, real-time audit-and-feedback tool) was developed based on learning/unlearning theory and formative evaluations and guided by the integrated-Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (i-PARIHS) Framework. Elements of the bundled and multifaceted implementation strategy to promote appropriate prescribing will include audit-and-feedback reports that include information about antibiotic harms, stakeholder engagement, patient and provider education, identification of local champions, and blended facilitation. The primary study outcome is adoption of evidence-based practice (de-implementation of inappropriate antimicrobial use). Clinical outcomes (cardiac device infections, acute kidney injuries and Clostridioides difficile infections) are secondary. Qualitative interviews will assess relevant implementation outcomes (acceptability, adoption, fidelity, feasibility).DiscussionDe-implementation theory suggests that factors that may have a particularly strong influence on de-implementation include strength of the underlying evidence, the complexity of the intervention, and patient and provider anxiety and fear about changing an established practice. This study will assess whether a multifaceted intervention mapped to identified de-implementation barriers leads to measurable improvements in provision of guideline-concordant antimicrobial use. Findings will improve understanding about factors that impact successful or unsuccessful de-implementation of harmful or wasteful healthcare practices.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT05020418.

Dataset Information

Reducing Antimicrobial Use in an Academic Pediatric Institution: Evaluation of the Effectiveness of a Prospective Audit With Real-Time Feedback.

Publications

Reducing Antimicrobial Use in an Academic Pediatric Institution: Evaluation of the Effectiveness of a Prospective Audit With Real-Time Feedback.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets