Antimicrobial stewardship programme implementation in the UAE: perspectives of key stakeholders using Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.

BACKGROUND: Many studies report antimicrobial stewardship programme (ASP) implementation, but these are limited by a lack of theoretical underpinning. This may lead to missing key factors that are likely to influence the successful or unsuccessful implementation. AIM: To explore key stakeholders' perspectives of ASP implementation in UAE hospitals, with a focus on facilitators and barriers. METHODS: The study employed a qualitative approach using semi-structured interviews conducted with ASP stakeholders involved in clinical use of antimicrobials at the individual patient level and including ASP team members and non-members. An interview schedule based on published literature and grounded in the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) was developed, reviewed, and piloted. Recruitment was via purposive and snowball sampling. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and thematically analysed by two independent researchers using CFIR as a coding framework. FINDINGS: Data saturation was achieved at 31 interviews. Multiple CFIR constructs were identified as implementation facilitators or barriers. Facilitators included external policy requirements (both national and international), leadership support, stakeholders' engagement, collaborative culture, effective communication, and forward planning. Barriers included blame culture, complexity of ASP implementation, and a shortage of expert personnel. CONCLUSION: Numerous facilitators and barriers to ASP implementation from a stakeholders' perspective were identified in this research. The value of early leadership engagement to support provision of required resources, a need for effective planning and establishment of multiple engagement techniques, and valuable communication with healthcare providers are the main recommendations emerging to support improvement in clinical practice.

The impact of COVID-19 on antimicrobial stewardship programme implementation in hospitals - an exploration informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: The disruption of antimicrobial stewardship programmes (ASPs) caused by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been recognized but not explored in depth. This study used a theoretical, qualitative approach to understand the impact of COVID-19 on ASP implementation in hospitals. METHODS: Semi-structured online interviews, informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), were conducted with ASP team members and non-members in hospitals. Participants were recruited via purposeful and snowball sampling with interviews video recorded, transcribed and analysed independently by two researchers based on mapping against CFIR constructs. RESULTS: Thirty-one interviews were conducted across 11 hospitals. The following themes were identified: (i) increased complexity of ASP implementation and changes in prescribing behaviour influenced by COVID-19; (ii) adaptations, networking and cosmopolitanism to enhance integration of COVID-19 management into ASP services; and (iii) adaptations and networking to support continuity of the ASP implementation process. A disruption to pre-pandemic ASP activities was reported, with complexity of COVID-19 overwhelming the healthcare system. ASP team members and services showed an ability to adapt and repurpose roles to respond to the pandemic. Interventions included developing national guidelines for treatment of patients with COVID-19 and contributing to guideline management and monitoring. A gradual restoration of ASP activities was perceived. Technological adaptations and enhancements in networking were reported as positive impacts of the pandemic. CONCLUSION: Despite the initial disruption of ASP implementation caused by the pandemic, successful adaptation and evolution of ASP services reflects the high value and adaptability of ASP implementation in hospitals in the United Arab Emirates.

Mapping hospital antimicrobial stewardship programmes in the Gulf Cooperation Council states against international standards: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: While there is evidence of implementation of antimicrobial stewardship programmes (ASPs) in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states, there has been limited benchmarking and mapping to international standards and frameworks. AIM: To critically appraise and synthesize the evidence of ASP implementation in GCC hospitals with reference to the framework of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), identifying key facilitators and barriers. METHODS: A systematic review protocol was developed based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses for Protocols guidelines. Five electronic databases were searched for studies published in English from 2010 onwards. Study selection, quality assessment and data extraction were performed independently by two reviewers. A narrative synthesis was conducted with ASP interventions mapped to CDC core elements. FINDINGS: Seventeen studies were identified, most of which (N=11) were from Saudi Arabia. Mapping to the CDC framework identified key areas of strengths and weaknesses in reporting implementation. Studies more commonly reported core elements of pharmacy expertise, selected aspects of implementation actions, tracking, antibiotic use and resistance, and education. Little emphasis was placed on the reporting of leadership and accountability. Key implementation facilitators were physician and organization support, information systems and education, and barriers were dedicated staff, workload and funding. CONCLUSION: There is a need to enhance the reporting of ASP implementation in GCC hospitals. The CDC framework should be used as a guide during the development, implementation and reporting of ASP interventions. Action is required to identify facilitators and overcome barriers, where possible.

A qualitative study of determinants of patient behaviour leading to an infection related hospital admission.

Objectives To describe and understand the determinants of patients' behaviours surrounding admission to hospital for an acute infective episode Method Patients admitted to the infection or acute medicine admission units of a major Scottish teaching hospital and commenced on antibiotic therapy after admission were included. Semi-structured face-to-face interviews were conducted using a pre-piloted interview schedule guide that focused on gathering information about patient behaviours and experiences prior to admission to hospital with an acute infection. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using the Framework Approach. Emerging themes were matched to the Theoretical Domains Framework of behavioural determinants. Results Twenty-one patients consented to participate and 18 transcripts were suitable for analysis. The most common infections were those of the skin, soft tissue and respiratory tract. From the patients' perspectives, behavioural determinants that appeared to impact their admission to hospital were principally their knowledge, beliefs of consequences, the environmental context and resources (mainly out-of-hours services), social influences and their own emotions. Determinants such as knowledge of the signs and symptoms, beliefs of consequences and environmental context were facilitators of health seeking behaviours. The main barriers were a lack of awareness of consequences of infection potentially leading to delayed admission impacting infection severity, stay in secondary care and resource utilisation. Conclusions This study has shown that any initial patient-centred intervention that is proposed to change patient behaviour needs to be based on behavioural determinants emerging in this research. The intervention may include aspects such as patient education on resources available out-of-hours and ways to access the healthcare system, education on recognising signs of infection leading to prompter treatment and positive reinforcement for patients who present with recurrences of infection.

A cross-sectional survey of antimicrobial stewardship strategies in UK hospitals.

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE: Antimicrobial stewardship programmes describe strategies to optimize antimicrobial prescribing and utilization, minimize resistance and improve patient outcomes. Strategies in hospitals are usually implemented by multidisciplinary antimicrobial teams (AMTs). The objective of this study was to describe the profile and activities of AMTs within hospitals in the United Kingdom (UK). METHOD: All hospitals within the UK (n = 836) were included, and a prepiloted questionnaire was mailed to the 'Director of Pharmacy'. Non-respondents were mailed up to two reminder questionnaires at two-weekly intervals. Main outcome measures are as follows: existence and remit of the AMTs; availability of antimicrobial-prescribing policies, aims, scope and methods of dissemination; and monitoring and feedback provided on antimicrobial policy adherence. RESULTS: Response rate was 33% (n = 273). Completed questionnaires analysed were n = 226. Eighty-two (n = 186) of respondents indicated the presence of an AMT within the hospital, with 95% of these (n = 177) reporting an antimicrobial pharmacist as part of the team. All AMTs (n = 186) were involved in development of an antimicrobial policy and almost all (99% n = 184) promoted adherence and restricting use of specific antimicrobials (97% n = 180). Ninety-eight per cent of respondents (n = 222) reported the availability of a local antimicrobial-prescribing policy within the hospital with this disseminated mainly through the hospital intranet (98% n = 217). Adherence to policy was measured mainly through audits measuring the appropriateness of antimicrobial use against the local policy (76% n = 169). Hospitals in England (P = 0·010), tertiary care hospitals (P = 0·021) and bed capacity >500 (P < 0·001) were more likely to have an AMT, as were hospitals with an accident and emergency department (P < 0·001), an infectious diseases unit (P = 0·019) and a microbiology department (P < 0·001). Audits to measure policy adherence were more likely (P < 0·001) if an AMT was present. The only variable retained in bivariate logistic regression was the presence of a microbiology unit, with an odds ratio of 14·1 (95% CI 6·02-33·33, P < 0·001). WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSIONS: Although most respondents reported an antimicrobial-prescribing policy, less had an AMT. Despite recent government and regional initiatives, further improvements in antimicrobial stewardship are still required.

Pharmacist prescribing in the UK - a literature review of current practice and research.

OBJECTIVE: To review the research literature to date on pharmacist prescribing in the United Kingdom (UK) and to explore the main areas of care and practice settings including any benefits and limitations. FINDINGS: There are two models of pharmacist prescribing in the UK: pharma\cist supplementary prescribing (SP) introduced in 2003, involving a voluntary partnership between the responsible independent prescriber (a physician or a dentist), the supplementary prescriber and the patient, to implement an agreed patient-specific clinical management plan; and pharmacist independent prescribing (IP) introduced in 2006, responsible for the assessment and consequent management, including prescribing of both undiagnosed and diagnosed conditions. There have been narrative reports of pharmacist SP in different health care settings including primary care, community pharmacies, secondary care and at the primary/secondary care interface; published research within these areas of care is conflicting as to which setting is more suitable for pharmacist prescribing. Initial research reports that almost 50% of pharmacist supplementary prescribers self-reported prescribing with both benefits of and barriers to implementing SP. Research involving other healthcare professionals has indicated that encroachment of traditional roles is likely to occur because of the advent of pharmacist prescribing. A small-scale study has concluded that patients are likely to accept pharmacist prescribing favourably, with another study showing pharmacist prescribing leading to improved adherence to guidelines. There is no published research yet available about practices involving pharmacist IP. DISCUSSION: Most of the literature focuses on pharmacists' perceptions of SP, with little information referring to other stakeholders, including patients. There is also limited published research focusing on clinical and economic outcomes of pharmacist SP. CONCLUSION: This is a rapidly changing aspect of pharmacy practice in the UK, particularly with the more recent introduction of pharmacist IP. It is likely that this area of research will expand rapidly over the coming years.