ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the quality of culture follow-up after emergency department (ED) discharge in patients with urinary tract infections (UTIs). METHODS: This convergent mixed methods study included an observational cohort study and a qualitative interview study in UTI patients discharged from the ED of a Dutch university hospital. The primary outcomes of the observational study were the proportion of patients requiring adjustment of antibiotic therapy after culture review, and the proportion of patients in whom these adjustments were made. Logistic regression identified factors associated with these outcomes. Interviews assessed patient experiences and transcripts were analysed using inductive thematic content analysis. Integration of the results informed recommendations for high-quality follow-up. RESULTS: Out of 455 patients, 285 (63%) required culture-based treatment adjustments. In most patients, no adjustments were made (239/285, 84%). De-escalation was most frequently omitted (98%), followed by discontinuation of antibiotics (92%). A mean of 7.1 (SDâ 3.8) antibiotic days per patient could have been avoided in 103 patients. Patients with diabetes were less likely to require adjustments (aORâ â0.50, 95%-CIâ 0.29-0.85). Patients with moderate or severe renal impairment (aORâ 4.1, 95%-CIâ 1.45-11.33; aORâ 4.2, 95%-CIâ â1.50-11.94) or recurrent UTIs (aORâ 5.0, 95%-CIâ 2.27-11.18) were more likely to have received necessary adjustments. Twelve interviews also revealed varying degrees of follow-up. Three themes were identified: 'information and communication', 'coordination and accessibility of care' and 'individual needs and preferences'. Recommendations for high-quality follow-up advocate a person centred approach. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the importance of urine culture follow-up after ED discharge, mainly to reduce unnecessary antibiotic treatment, promote de-escalation and improve patient experience.
Subject(s)
Anti-Bacterial Agents , Emergency Service, Hospital , Patient Discharge , Urinary Tract Infections , Humans , Urinary Tract Infections/drug therapy , Male , Female , Emergency Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Middle Aged , Aged , Netherlands , Follow-Up Studies , Adult , Cohort Studies , Aged, 80 and overABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: In the care of patients with persevering (‘treatment-resistant’) persistant physical symptoms (PPS), problems are common. With this study, we want to identify starting points for improvement of care, including suggestions for the role of mental health care. AIM: Using the profile for persevering PPS we will estimate the prevalence, describe characteristics of this patient group and map problems encountered in their care. METHOD: Online survey in general practitioners (GPs). RESULTS: The response rate to the survey was 12.8%. The mean estimated prevalence of persevering PPS in general practice was 0.7% (corresponding to an estimated 122,500 patients throughout the Netherlands). Many patients encountered iatrogenic harm, experience societal problems and limitations in mobility and ADL independence. Although there was a general increased use of health care in these patients, some also avoided care or were under-treated. In the persistence of symptoms, patient-related factors played a role (like insisting on further somatic diagnostic tests, lack of motivation for PPS-specific treatment), but health-care related factors, like rejection for care or a lack of regional treatment options for patients with PPS, also had a causal role. CONCLUSION: Almost every GP experiences problems in the care for patients with persevering PPS. Mental health care professionals can support the GP better, by optimizing options for consultation and referral.
Subject(s)
General Practice , Humans , Netherlands , Male , Female , Surveys and Questionnaires , PrevalenceABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the use of a COVID-19 app containing relevant information for healthcare workers (HCWs) in hospitals and to determine user experience. METHODS: A smartphone app (Firstline) was adapted to exclusively contain local COVID-19 policy documents and treatment protocols. This COVID-19 app was offered to all HCWs of a 900-bed tertiary care hospital. App use was evaluated with user analytics and user experience in an online questionnaire. RESULTS: A total number of 1168 HCWs subscribed to the COVID-19 app which was used 3903 times with an average of 1 minute and 20 seconds per session during a three-month period. The number of active users peaked in April 2020 with 1017 users. Users included medical specialists (22.3%), residents (16.5%), nurses (22.2%), management (6.2%) and other (26.5%). Information for HCWs such as when to test for SARS-CoV-2 (1214), latest updates (1181), the COVID-19 telephone list (418) and the SARS-CoV-2 / COVID-19 guideline (280) were the most frequently accessed advice. Seventy-one users with a mean age of 46.1 years from 19 different departments completed the questionnaire. Respondents considered the COVID-19 app clear (54/59; 92%), easy-to-use (46/55; 84%), fast (46/52; 88%), useful (52/56; 93%), and had faith in the information (58/70; 83%). The COVID-19 app was used to quickly look up something (43/68; 63%), when no computer was available (15/68; 22%), look up / dial COVID-related phone numbers (15/68; 22%) or when walking from A to B (11/68; 16%). Few respondents felt app use cost time (5/68; 7%). CONCLUSIONS: Our COVID-19 app proved to be a relatively simple yet innovative tool that was used by HCWs from all disciplines involved in taking care of COVID-19 patients. The up-to-date app was used for different topics and had high user satisfaction amongst questionnaire respondents. An app with local hospital policy could be an invaluable tool during a pandemic.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Health Personnel , Hospitals , Mobile Applications , Health Policy , Humans , Information Dissemination , SARS-CoV-2 , SmartphoneABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Various metrics of hospital antibiotic use might assist in guiding antimicrobial stewardship (AMS). OBJECTIVES: To compare patient outcomes in association with three methods to measure and feedback information on hospital antibiotic use when used in developing an AMS intervention. METHODS: Three methods were randomly allocated to 42 clusters from 21 Dutch hospitals: (1) feedback on quantity of antibiotic use [DDD, days-of-therapy (DOT) from hospital pharmacy data], versus feedback on (2) validated, or (3) non-validated quality indicators from point prevalence studies. Using this feedback together with an implementation tool, stewardship teams systematically developed and performed improvement strategies. The hospital length of stay (LOS) was the primary outcome and secondary outcomes included DOT, ICU stay and hospital mortality. Data were collected before (February-May 2015) and after (February-May 2017) the intervention period. RESULTS: The geometric mean hospital LOS decreased from 9.5 days (95% CI 8.9-10.1, 4245 patients) at baseline to 9.0 days (95% CI 8.5-9.6, 4195 patients) after intervention (Pâ<â0.001). No differences in effect on LOS or secondary outcomes were found between methods. Feedback on quality of antibiotic use was used more often to identify improvement targets and was preferred over feedback on quantity of use. Consistent use of the implementation tool seemed to increase effectiveness of the AMS intervention. CONCLUSIONS: The decrease in LOS versus baseline likely reflects improvement in the quality of antibiotic use with the stewardship intervention. While the outcomes with the three methods were otherwise similar, stewardship teams preferred data on the quality over the quantity of antibiotic use.
Subject(s)
Anti-Bacterial Agents , Antimicrobial Stewardship , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Feedback , Hospitals , Humans , Length of StayABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: With the widespread use of electronic health records and handheld electronic devices in hospitals, informatics-based antimicrobial stewardship interventions hold great promise as tools to promote appropriate antimicrobial drug prescribing. However, more research is needed to evaluate their optimal design and impact on quantity and quality of antimicrobial prescribing. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Use of smartphone-based digital stewardship applications (apps) with local guideline directed empirical antimicrobial use by physicians will be compared with antimicrobial prescription as per usual as primary outcome in three hospitals in the Netherlands, Sweden and Switzerland. Secondary outcomes will include antimicrobial use metrics, clinical and process outcomes. A multicentre stepped-wedge cluster randomised trial will randomise entities defined as wards or specialty regarding time of introduction of the intervention. We will include 36 hospital entities with seven measurement periods in which the primary outcome will be measured in 15 participating patients per time period per cluster. At participating wards, patients of at least 18 years of age using antimicrobials will be included. After a baseline period of 2-week measurements, six periods of 4 weeks will follow in which the intervention is introduced in 6 wards (in three hospitals) until all 36 wards have implemented the intervention. Thereafter, we allow use of the app by everyone, and evaluate the sustainability of the app use 6 months later. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This protocol has been approved by the institutional review board of each participating centre. Results will be disseminated via media, to healthcare professionals via professional training and meetings and to researchers via conferences and publications. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov registry (NCT03793946). Stage; pre-results.
Subject(s)
Antimicrobial Stewardship , Mobile Applications , Smartphone , Cluster Analysis , Humans , Multicenter Studies as Topic , Netherlands , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Research Design , Sweden , SwitzerlandABSTRACT
Dutch healthcare institutions are relatively successful in preventing outbreaks of antibiotic-resistant pathogens, thus protecting vulnerable patients. However, measures taken to prevent the introduction and spread of MDROs can be burdensome for asymptomatic carriers of such bacteria or for people who may have been exposed to them. This leads to ethical dilemmas. On the basis of a study of the impact of being a carrier and precautionary measures on carrier well-being, we present an ethical framework for responsible care for carriers. We argue that solidarity requires that the burden of prevention and control of resistance is to be shouldered by society as a whole. It is not right to see this problem primarily as a conflict between the protection of vulnerable patients on the one hand and carriers on the other.
Subject(s)
Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Carrier State/therapy , Cross Infection/microbiology , Drug Resistance, Multiple, Bacterial , Ethics, Medical , Infection Control/methods , Bacteria , Disease Outbreaks , Humans , Vulnerable PopulationsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: We previously developed proxy indicators (PIs) that can be used to estimate the appropriateness of medications used for infectious diseases (in particular antibiotics) in primary care, based on routine reimbursement data that do not include clinical indications. OBJECTIVES: To: (i) select the PIs that are relevant for children and estimate current appropriateness of medications used for infectious diseases by French paediatricians and its variability while using these PIs; (ii) assess the clinimetric properties of these PIs using a large regional reimbursement database; and (iii) compare performance scores for each PI between paediatricians and GPs in the paediatric population. METHODS: For all individuals living in north-eastern France, a cross-sectional observational study was performed analysing National Health Insurance data (available at prescriber and patient levels) regarding antibiotics prescribed by their paediatricians in 2017. We measured performance scores of the PIs, and we tested their clinimetric properties, i.e. measurability, applicability and room for improvement. RESULTS: We included 116 paediatricians who prescribed a total of 44 146 antibiotic treatments in 2017. For all four selected PIs (seasonal variation of total antibiotic use, amoxicillin/second-line antibiotics ratio, co-prescription of anti-inflammatory drugs and antibiotics), we found large variations between paediatricians. Regarding clinimetric properties, all PIs were measurable and applicable, and showed high improvement potential. Performance scores did not differ between these 116 paediatricians and 3087 GPs. CONCLUSIONS: This set of four proxy indicators might be used to estimate appropriateness of prescribing in children in an automated way within antibiotic stewardship programmes.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Antimicrobial stewardship interventions and programmes aim to ensure effective treatment while minimizing antimicrobial-associated harms including resistance. Practice in this vital area is undermined by the poor quality of research addressing both what specific antimicrobial use interventions are effective and how antimicrobial use improvement strategies can be implemented into practice. In 2016 we established a working party to identify the key design features that limit translation of existing research into practice and then to make recommendations for how future studies in this field should be optimally designed. The first part of this work has been published as a systematic review. Here we present the working group's final recommendations. METHODS: An international working group for design of antimicrobial stewardship intervention evaluations was convened in response to the fourth call for leading expert network proposals by the Joint Programming Initiative on Antimicrobial Resistance (JPIAMR). The group comprised clinical and academic specialists in antimicrobial stewardship and clinical trial design from six European countries. Group members completed a structured questionnaire to establish the scope of work and key issues to develop ahead of a first face-to-face meeting that (a) identified the need for a comprehensive systematic review of study designs in the literature and (b) prioritized key areas where research design considerations restrict translation of findings into practice. The working group's initial outputs were reviewed by independent advisors and additional expertise was sought in specific clinical areas. At a second face-to-face meeting the working group developed a theoretical framework and specific recommendations to support optimal study design. These were finalized by the working group co-ordinators and agreed by all working group members. RESULTS: We propose a theoretical framework in which consideration of the intervention rationale the intervention setting, intervention features and the intervention aims inform selection and prioritization of outcome measures, whether the research sets out to determine superiority or non-inferiority of the intervention measured by its primary outcome(s), the most appropriate study design (e.g. experimental or quasi- experimental) and the detailed design features. We make 18 specific recommendation in three domains: outcomes, objectives and study design. CONCLUSIONS: Researchers, funders and practitioners will be able to draw on our recommendations to most efficiently evaluate antimicrobial stewardship interventions.
Subject(s)
Antimicrobial Stewardship/organization & administration , Antimicrobial Stewardship/standards , Consensus , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Bacteria/drug effects , Clinical Trials as Topic , Europe , Humans , Internationality , Research Design , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate the current state of antibiotic stewardship (ABS) in French public and private acute care hospitals. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional online questionnaire survey. The selection of participating hospitals was performed through a stratified random sampling procedure among all French public and private hospitals with acute care beds. RESULTS: 97/215 (45%) hospitals participated. A formal ABS program was implemented in 84% (80/95) of hospitals. A person officially in charge of this program (i.e., ABS program leader) was present in almost all participating hospitals (99%, 95/96) and s/he coordinated a multidisciplinary ABS team in 42% (40/96) of cases. The median time spent on ABS activities was 1.7, 1.6, and 0.8hours/week/100 acute care beds for infectious disease (ID) specialists, pharmacists, and microbiologists respectively; 27% (7/26) of ID specialists/other clinicians, 58% (15/26) of pharmacists, and 80% (16/20) of microbiologists received no salary support for the stewardship activities conducted as part of the team. Local guidelines (94%, 88/94), electronic medical records (85%, 80/94), and an antibiotic restriction policy (92%, 82/89) were implemented in almost all hospitals. Reports on antibiotic consumption and local resistance rates were available in 100% (91/91) and 84% (76/91) of hospitals, respectively. CONCLUSION: Despite the existence of national requirements, hospital ABS programs are not fully implemented in France, mainly because of inadequate institutional support and funding.
Subject(s)
Antimicrobial Stewardship/statistics & numerical data , Hospitals/statistics & numerical data , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/statistics & numerical data , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Antimicrobial Stewardship/organization & administration , Antimicrobial Stewardship/standards , Cross-Sectional Studies , France/epidemiology , Guideline Adherence/statistics & numerical data , Health Facilities/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Implementation Science , Pharmacists/standards , Pharmacists/statistics & numerical data , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/standards , Quality Indicators, Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
We studied trends in the incidence of health care-associated infections (HAIs) in LTCFs between 2009 and 2015 and determined the effect of participation in our network. Elder-care physicians reported weekly the number of cases of influenza-like illness, gastroenteritis, (probable) pneumonia, urinary tract infections (UTIs) and all-cause mortality. Trends in the incidence of infection and mortality in relation to LTCF characteristics were calculated using multilevel univariate and multivariate logistic regression. Thirty LTCF participated for 3 years or more, 16 for 2 years and the remaining 12 LTCF for 1 year. During the study period, the median number of beds decreased from 158 to 139, whereas the percentage of residents with private bedrooms increased from 14% to 87%. UTIs were the most frequently reported infections, followed by (probable) pneumonia and gastroenteritis. Adjusted for calendar year and season, we observed a statistically significant decrease in the incidence of influenza-like illness (odds ratio (OR) = 0.8, P < 0.01) and (probable) pneumonia (OR = 0.8, P < 0.01) for each extra year an LTCF participated. Although there are other likely contributors, such as more private rooms and enhanced infection control measures, the decreasing trend of HAI in LTCFs participating in surveillance implies that surveillance is a valuable addition to current strategies to optimise infection control.
Subject(s)
Cross Infection/epidemiology , Epidemiological Monitoring , Long-Term Care , Cross Infection/mortality , Health Facilities , Humans , Incidence , Netherlands/epidemiology , Survival AnalysisABSTRACT
Objective: To investigate the cost-effectiveness of five different tumour necrosis factor inhibitor tapering strategies in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and stable low disease activity, using a modelling design.Method: Using Markov models based on data from the DRESS and STRASS randomized controlled trials, and the Nijmegen RA cohort, five tapering strategies for etanercept and adalimumab were tested against continuation: 1, four-step tapering (DRESS strategy); 2, five-step tapering; 3, tapering without withdrawal; 4, use of a stricter flare criterion; and 5, use of a theoretical predictor for successful tapering. We also examined how well a biomarker should be able to predict in order for strategy 5 to become cost-effective compared to the other strategies.Results: All examined tapering strategies were cost saving (range: EUR 5128 to 7873) but yielded more short-lived flares compared to continuation. The change in utilities compared to continuation was minimal and not clinically relevant (range: -0.005 to 0.007 quality-adjusted life-years). Strategy 1 was cost-effective compared to all other strategies [highest incremental net monetary benefit (iNMB)]. However, there was a large overlap in credible intervals, especially between strategies 1 and 2. Scenario analyses showed that 50% reduction of drug prices would result in the highest iNMB for strategy 2. A biomarker only becomes cost-effective when it is inexpensive and has a sensitivity and specificity of at least 84%.Conclusion: Because our study showed a comparable iNMB for tapering in four or five steps (including discontinuation), we recommend a choice between these strategies, based on shared decision making.
Subject(s)
Arthritis, Rheumatoid/drug therapy , Markov Chains , Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha/antagonists & inhibitors , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Decision Making, Shared , Humans , Quality-Adjusted Life YearsABSTRACT
Antimicrobial stewardship programmes (ASPs) are designed to improve antibiotic use. A survey was systematically developed to assess ASP prerequisites, objectives and improvement strategies in hospitals. This study assessed the current state of ASPs in acute-care hospitals throughout Europe. A survey containing 46 questions was disseminated to acute-care hospitals: all Dutch (nâ¯=â¯80) and Slovenian (nâ¯=â¯29), 215 French (25%, random stratified sampling) and 62 Italian (49% of hospitals with an infectious diseases department, convenience sampling) acute-care hospitals, for a Europe-wide assessment. Response rates for the Netherlands (Nl), Slovenia (Slo), France (Fr) and Italy (It) were 80%, 86%, 45% and 66%. There was variation between countries in the prerequisites met and the objectives and improvement strategies chosen. A formal ASP was present mainly in the Netherlands (90%) and France (84%) compared with Slovenia (60%) and Italy (60%). Presence of an antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) team ranged from 42% (Fr) to 94% (Nl). Salary support for AMS teams was provided in 68% (Fr), 51% (Nl), 33% (Slo) and 12% (It) of surveyed hospitals. Quantity of antibiotic use was monitored in the majority of hospitals, ranging from 72% (Nl) to 100% (Slo and Fr) of acute-care hospitals. Participating countries varied substantially in the use of 'prospective monitoring and advice' as a strategy to improve AMS objectives. ASP prerequisites, objectives and improvement activities vary considerably across Europe, with room for improvement. Stimulating appropriate system prerequisites throughout Europe, e.g. by introducing staffing standards and financial support for ASPs, seems a first priority.
Subject(s)
Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Antimicrobial Stewardship/methods , Communicable Diseases/drug therapy , Drug Utilization/standards , Emergency Medical Services/methods , Cross-Sectional Studies , Drug Utilization/statistics & numerical data , Europe , Hospitals , Humans , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: A comprehensive overview of the ways control measures directed at carriers of multidrug-resistant organisms (MDRO) affect daily life of carriers is lacking. In this systematic literature review, we sought to explore how carriers experience being a carrier and how they experience being subjected to control measures by looking at the impact on basic capabilities. METHODS: We searched Medline, Embase and PsychINFO until 26 May 2016 for studies addressing experiences of MDRO carriers. Twenty-seven studies were included, addressing experiences with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (n = 21), ESBL (n = 1), multiple MDRO (n = 4) and other (n = 1, not specified). We categorized reported experiences according to Nussbaum's capability approach. RESULTS: Carriage and control measures were found to interfere with quality of care, cause negative emotions, limit interactions with loved ones, cause stigmatization, limit recreational activities and create financial and professional insecurity. Further, carriers have difficulties with full comprehension of the problem of antimicrobial resistance, thus affecting six out of ten basic capabilities. CONCLUSIONS: Applying Nussbaum's capability approach visualizes an array of unintended consequences of control measures. Carriers experience stigmatization, especially in healthcare settings, and have limited understanding of their situation and the complexities of antimicrobial resistance.
Subject(s)
Carrier State/microbiology , Drug Resistance, Multiple, Bacterial , Infection Control , Patient Care , Humans , Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus , Patient Care/methods , Patient Care/psychology , Patient Satisfaction , Staphylococcal Infections/prevention & control , Staphylococcal Infections/transmissionABSTRACT
A cornerstone of antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) is monitoring quantitative antibiotic use. Frequently used metrics are defined daily dose (DDD) and days of therapy (DOT). The purpose of this study was (1) to explore for the hospital setting the possibilities of quantitative data retrieval on the level of medical specialty and (2) to describe factors affecting the usability and interpretation of these quantitative metrics. We performed a retrospective observational study, measuring overall systemic antibiotic use at specialty level over a 1-year period, from December 1st 2014 to December 1st 2015, in one university and 13 non-university hospitals in the Netherlands. We distinguished surgical and non-surgical adult specialties. The association between DDDs, calculated from aggregated dispensing data, and DOTs, calculated from patient-level prescription data, was explored descriptively and related to organizational factors, data sources (prescription versus dispensing data), data registration, and data extraction. Twelve hospitals were able to extract dispensing data (DDD), three of which on the level of medical specialty; 13 hospitals were able to extract prescription data (DOT), 11 of which by medical specialty. A large variation in quantitative antibiotic use was found between hospitals and the correlation between DDDs and DOTs at specialty level was low. Differences between hospitals related to organizational factors, data sources, data registration, and data extraction procedures likely contributed to the variation in quantitative use and the low correlation between DDDs and DOTs. The differences in healthcare organization, data sources, data registration, and data extraction procedures contributed to the variation in reported quantitative use between hospitals. Uniform registration and extraction procedures are necessary for appropriate measurement and interpretation and benchmarking of quantitative antibiotic use.
Subject(s)
Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Antimicrobial Stewardship/methods , Drug Utilization/statistics & numerical data , Hospitals/statistics & numerical data , Drug Utilization/standards , Hospitals/standards , Humans , Medical Order Entry Systems/statistics & numerical data , Medication Systems, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Netherlands , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To explore inpatients experiences and views with regard to antibiotics in five European hospitals. METHODS: Qualitative study where a patient-centred framework was used to explore inpatients' experiences concerning antibiotic treatment. A purposeful sample of inpatients treated with antibiotics in five hospitals participated in interviews (all centres) and focus groups (Switzerland only). RESULTS: A total of 31 interviews (five in Belgium, ten in Croatia, nine in France, five in the Netherlands and two in Switzerland) and three focus groups (in Switzerland, 11 participants) were performed. The median age of participants was 61 years (range 33-86 years). The following main themes emerged: (a) patients trust doctors to take the best decisions for them even though communication concerning different antibiotic-related aspects is often insufficient, (b) patients feel that doctors do not prioritize communication due to time constraints and do not seem to adapt information based on patients' preferences, (c) patients differ in their wish to be informed but overall want to be informed on the main aspects in an understandable way, (d) patients often find reassurance in sharing information about their antibiotic treatment with close family, (e) professionals should explore patients' preferences to be involved or not in shared decision making for antibiotic treatment. CONCLUSION: Inpatients often doubt their ability to understand medical information and trust their physicians to take the best decisions for them. Tailored strategies that inform hospitalized patients, acknowledging their concerns and preferences, may be useful to promote patient involvement and to improve communication regarding antibiotic use.
Subject(s)
Anti-Bacterial Agents/administration & dosage , Decision Making , Inpatients , Qualitative Research , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Europe , Female , Humans , Male , Middle AgedABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: We aimed to assess patient-related determinants potentially influencing antibiotic use. METHODS: Studies published in MEDLINE until 30 September 2015 were searched. We included: qualitative studies describing patients' self-reported determinants of antibiotic use; and quantitative studies on either self-reported or objectively assessed determinants associated with antibiotic use. Whenever possible, reported determinants were categorized as 'barriers' or 'facilitators' of responsible antibiotic use. RESULTS: A total of 87 studies from 33 countries were included. Seventy-five (86.2%) were quantitative and described self-reported (45/75, 60.0%), objectively assessed (20/75, 26.7%) or self-reported and objectively assessed (10/75, 13.3%) patient-related determinants. Twelve (12/87, 13.8%) were qualitative studies or had a qualitative and quantitative component. Eighty-six of the studies (98.8%) concerned the outpatient setting. We identified seven broad categories of determinants having an impact on different aspects of antibiotic use (in descending order of frequency): demographic and socio-economic characteristics, patient-doctor interactions (e.g. counselling), treatment characteristics (e.g. administration frequency), attitudes (e.g. expecting antibiotics), access to treatment (e.g. patients' direct costs), characteristics of the condition for which the antibiotic was prescribed (e.g. duration of symptoms), knowledge (e.g. regarding indications for treatment). Most determinants were classified as 'barriers' to responsible antibiotic use. CONCLUSION: A large variety of patient-related determinants impact antibiotic use. The most easily 'modifiable' determinants concern patient-doctor interactions, treatment characteristics and knowledge. Data from the inpatient setting and low- and middle-income countries were underrepresented. Further studies should develop and test interventions that take these determinants into account with the ultimate aim of improving responsible use of antibiotics.
Subject(s)
Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Inpatients/psychology , Outpatients/psychology , Drug Prescriptions , Humans , Socioeconomic FactorsABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To develop a consensus-based set of generic competencies in antimicrobial prescribing and stewardship for European prescribers through a structured consensus procedure. METHODS: The RAND-modified Delphi procedure comprised two online questionnaire rounds, a face-to-face meeting between rounds, and a final review. Our departure point was a set of competencies agreed previously by consensus among a UK multi-disciplinary panel, and which had been subsequently revised through consultation with ESCMID Study Group representatives. The 46 draft competency points were reviewed by an expert panel consisting of specialists in infectious diseases and clinical microbiology, and pharmacists. Each proposed competency was assessed using a nine-point Likert scale, for relevance as a minimum standard for all independent prescribers in all European countries. RESULTS: A total of 65 expert panel members participated, from 24 European countries (one to six experts per country). There was very high satisfaction (98%) with the final competencies set, which included 35 competency points, in three sections: core concepts in microbiology, pathogenesis and diagnosing infections (11 points); antimicrobial prescribing (20 points); and antimicrobial stewardship (4 points). CONCLUSIONS: The consensus achieved enabled the production of generic antimicrobial prescribing and stewardship competencies for all European independent prescribers, and of possible global utility. These can be used for training and can be further adapted to the needs of specific professional groups.
Subject(s)
Antimicrobial Stewardship , Clinical Competence , Consensus , Drug Prescriptions/standards , Anti-Bacterial Agents/administration & dosage , Curriculum , Drug Prescriptions/statistics & numerical data , Education , Europe , Professional CompetenceABSTRACT
Background: Stewardship guidelines define three essential building blocks for successful hospital antimicrobial stewardship programmes (ASPs): stewardship prerequisites, stewardship objectives and improvement strategies. Objectives: We systematically developed a survey, based on these building blocks, to evaluate the current state of antimicrobial stewardship in hospitals. We tested this survey in 64 Dutch acute care hospitals. Methods: We performed a literature review on surveys of antimicrobial stewardship. After extraction and categorization of survey questions, five experts merged and rephrased questions during a consensus meeting. After a pilot study, the survey was sent to 80 Dutch hospitals. Results: The final survey consisted of 46 questions, categorized into hospital characteristics, stewardship prerequisites, stewardship objectives and stewardship strategies. The response rate was 80% (n = 64). Ninety-four percent of hospitals had established an antimicrobial stewardship team, consisting of at least one hospital pharmacist and one clinical microbiologist. An infectious diseases specialist was present in 68% of the teams. Nine percent had dedicated IT support. Forty-one percent of the teams were financially supported, with a median of 0.6 full-time equivalents (FTE; 0.1-1.8). The majority of hospitals performed monitoring of restricted antibiotic agents (91%), dose optimization (65%), bedside consultation (56%) and intravenous-to-oral switch (53%). Fifty-eight percent of the hospitals provided education to residents and 28% to specialists. Conclusions: The survey provides information on the progress that is being made in hospitals regarding the three building blocks of a successful ASP, and provides clear aims to strengthen ASPs. Ultimately, these data will be related to national data on antibiotic consumption and resistance.
Subject(s)
Antimicrobial Stewardship/organization & administration , Health Policy , Hospitals , Health Services Research , Humans , Netherlands , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
SCOPE: Antimicrobial stewardship teams are responsible for implementing antimicrobial stewardship programmes (ASP). However, in many countries, lack of funding challenges this obligation. A consensus procedure was performed to investigate which structural activities need to be performed by Dutch stewardship teams and how much time (and thus full-time equivalent (FTE) labor) is needed to perform these activities. METHODS: In 2015, an electronic survey, based on a nonsystematic literature search and interviews with seven experienced stewardship teams, was sent to 21 stewardship teams that performed an ASP. This was followed by a semistructured face-to-face consensus meeting. Fourteen stewardship teams completed the survey (18% of Dutch acute-care hospitals), and 13 participated in the consensus meeting. RECOMMENDATIONS: The hours needed each year are dependent on hospital size and number of stewardship objectives monitored. If all activities are performed at a minimal base (one stewardship objective; minimal staffing standard), time investment was estimated to be 1393 to 2680 hours annually in the early phase, corresponding with 0.87 (300 beds) to 1.68 FTE (1200 beds), with a further increase to minimally 1.25 to 3.18 FTE in the following years with three stewardship objectives monitored (optimal staffing standards during the first few years of implementing an ASP). This consensus on required human resources provides a directive for structural financial support of stewardship teams in the Dutch context. Some stewardship activities (and related time investments) might be specific to the Dutch context and hospital setting. To develop standards for other settings, our methodology could be applied.
Subject(s)
Antimicrobial Stewardship , Consensus , Workforce/economics , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Hospitals/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Netherlands , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
Objectives: To evaluate a clinical decision support system (CDSS) based on consensus-based intravenous to oral switch criteria, which identifies intravenous to oral switch candidates. Methods: A three-step evaluation study of a stand-alone CDSS with electronic health record interoperability was performed at the Erasmus University Medical Centre in the Netherlands. During the first step, we performed a technical validation. During the second step, we determined the sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value and positive predictive value in a retrospective cohort of all hospitalized adult patients starting at least one therapeutic antibacterial drug between 1 and 16 May 2013. ICU, paediatric and psychiatric wards were excluded. During the last step the clinical relevance and usefulness was prospectively assessed by reports to infectious disease specialists. An alert was considered clinically relevant if antibiotics could be discontinued or switched to oral therapy at the time of the alert. Results: During the first step, one technical error was found. The second step yielded a positive predictive value of 76.6% and a negative predictive value of 99.1%. The third step showed that alerts were clinically relevant in 53.5% of patients. For 43.4% it had already been decided to discontinue or switch the intravenous antibiotics by the treating physician. In 10.1%, the alert resulted in advice to change antibiotic policy and was considered useful. Conclusions: This prospective cohort study shows that the alerts were clinically relevant in >50% (n = 449) and useful in 10% (n = 85). The CDSS needs to be evaluated in hospitals with varying activity of infectious disease consultancy services as this probably influences usefulness.