Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
1.
Future Microbiol ; 11(1): 93-102, 2016.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26323589

RESUMO

Considering the threat of antimicrobial resistance and the difficulties it entails in treating infections, it is necessary to cross borders and approach infection management in an integrated, multidisciplinary manner. We propose the antimicrobial, infection prevention and diagnostic stewardship model comprising three intertwined programs: antimicrobial, infection prevention and diagnostic stewardship, involving all stakeholders. The focus is a so-called 'theragnostics' approach. This leads to a personalized infection management plan, improving patient care and minimizing resistance development. Furthermore, it is important that healthcare regions nationally and internationally work together, ensuring that the patient (and microorganism) transfers will not cause problems in a neighboring institution. This antimicrobial, infection prevention and diagnostic stewardship model can serve as a blue print to implement innovative, integrative infection management.


Assuntos
Anti-Infecciosos/uso terapêutico , Doenças Transmissíveis/diagnóstico , Doenças Transmissíveis/tratamento farmacológico , Testes Diagnósticos de Rotina/métodos , Resistência Microbiana a Medicamentos , Uso de Medicamentos/normas , Controle de Infecções/métodos , Doenças Transmissíveis/transmissão , Humanos
2.
PLoS One ; 10(5): e0126106, 2015.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25955494

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: In order to stimulate appropriate antimicrobial use and thereby lower the chances of resistance development, an Antibiotic Stewardship Team (A-Team) has been implemented at the University Medical Center Groningen, the Netherlands. Focus of the A-Team was a pro-active day 2 case-audit, which was financially evaluated here to calculate the return on investment from a hospital perspective. METHODS: Effects were evaluated by comparing audited patients with a historic cohort with the same diagnosis-related groups. Based upon this evaluation a cost-minimization model was created that can be used to predict the financial effects of a day 2 case-audit. Sensitivity analyses were performed to deal with uncertainties. Finally, the model was used to financially evaluate the A-Team. RESULTS: One whole year including 114 patients was evaluated. Implementation costs were calculated to be €17,732, which represent total costs spent to implement this A-Team. For this specific patient group admitted to a urology ward and consulted on day 2 by the A-Team, the model estimated total savings of €60,306 after one year for this single department, leading to a return on investment of 5.9. CONCLUSIONS: The implemented multi-disciplinary A-Team performing a day 2 case-audit in the hospital had a positive return on investment caused by a reduced length of stay due to a more appropriate antibiotic therapy. Based on the extensive data analysis, a model of this intervention could be constructed. This model could be used by other institutions, using their own data to estimate the effects of a day 2 case-audit in their hospital.


Assuntos
Antibacterianos/uso terapêutico , Grupos Diagnósticos Relacionados/economia , Encaminhamento e Consulta/economia , Unidade Hospitalar de Urologia/economia , Análise Custo-Benefício , Hospitalização/economia , Hospitais Universitários/organização & administração , Humanos , Modelos Econômicos , Países Baixos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA