Follow-up of patients with urinary tract infections discharged from the emergency department: a mixed methods study.

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 (SD  3.8) antibiotic days per patient could have been avoided in 103 patients. Patients with diabetes were less likely to require adjustments (aOR   0.50, 95%-CI  0.29-0.85). Patients with moderate or severe renal impairment (aOR  4.1, 95%-CI  1.45-11.33; aOR  4.2, 95%-CI   1.50-11.94) or recurrent UTIs (aOR  5.0, 95%-CI  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.

Use of a smartphone app to inform healthcare workers of hospital policy during a pandemic such as COVID-19: A mixed methods observational study.

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.

A multicentre cluster-randomized clinical trial to improve antibiotic use and reduce length of stay in hospitals: comparison of three measurement and feedback methods.

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 (P < 0.001). 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.

[Ethically responsible care for MDRO carriers]. / Ethisch verantwoorde zorg voor BRMO-dragers.

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.

Proxy indicators to estimate the appropriateness of medications prescribed by paediatricians in infectious diseases: a cross-sectional observational study based on reimbursement data.

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.

Comparison of antimicrobial stewardship programmes in acute-care hospitals in four European countries: A cross-sectional survey.

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 (n = 80) and Slovenian (n = 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.

How to measure quantitative antibiotic use in order to support antimicrobial stewardship in acute care hospitals: a retrospective observational study.

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.

A survey on antimicrobial stewardship prerequisites, objectives and improvement strategies: systematic development and nationwide assessment in Dutch acute care hospitals.

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.

Human resources required for antimicrobial stewardship teams: a Dutch consensus report.

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.

Antibiotic stewardship: does it work in hospital practice? A review of the evidence base.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines for developing and implementing stewardship programmes include recommendations on appropriate antibiotic use to guide the stewardship team's choice of potential stewardship objectives. They also include recommendations on behavioural change interventions to guide the team's choice of potential interventions to ensure that professionals actually use antibiotics appropriately in daily practice. AIMS: To summarize the evidence base of both appropriate antibiotic use recommendations (the 'what') and behavioural change interventions (the 'how') in hospital practice. SOURCES: Published systematic reviews/Medline. CONTENT: The literature shows low-quality evidence of the positive effects of appropriate antibiotic use in hospital patients. The literature shows that any behavioural change intervention might work to ensure that professionals actually perform appropriate antibiotic use recommendations in daily practice. Although effects were overall positive, there were large differences in improvement between studies that tested similar change interventions. IMPLICATIONS: The literature showed a clear need for studies that apply appropriate study designs- (randomized) controlled designs-to test the effectiveness of appropriate antibiotic use on achieving meaningful outcomes. Most current studies used designs prone to confounding by indication. In the process of selecting behavioural change interventions that might work best in a chosen setting, much should be learned from behavioural sciences. The challenge for stewardship teams lies in selecting change interventions on the careful assessment of barriers and facilitators, and on a theoretical base while linking determinants to change interventions. Future studies should apply more robust designs and evaluations when assessing behavioural change interventions.

Clinical condition and comorbidity as determinants for blood culture positivity in patients with skin and soft-tissue infections.

The utility of performing blood cultures in patients with a suspected skin infection is debated. We investigated the association between blood culture positivity rates and patients' clinical condition, including acute disease severity and comorbidity. We performed a retrospective study, including patients with cellulitis and wound infection who had been enrolled in three Dutch multicenter studies between 2011 and 2015. Patients' acute clinical condition was assessed using the Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS; severe: MEWS ≥2) and comorbidity with the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI; severe: CCI ≥2). A total of 334 patients with a suspected skin infection were included. Blood cultures were performed in 175 patients (52%), 28 of whom (16%) had a positive blood culture. Data on the clinical condition were collected in 275 patients. Blood cultures were performed in 76% of the patients with a severe acute condition, compared with 48% with a non-severe acute condition (OR 3.5; 95% confidence interval: 2.0-6.2; p < 0.001). Blood cultures were positive in 18% and 12% respectively (OR 1.7 (0.7-4.1); p = 0.3). Blood cultures were performed in 53% of patients with severe comorbidity, compared with 61% without severe comorbidity (OR 0.7; 0.4-1.2; p = 0.2). Blood cultures were positive in 25% and 10% respectively (OR = 3.1; 1.2-7.5; p = 0.02). The blood culture positivity rate among hospitalized patients diagnosed with skin infections was higher than the rates reported by the Infectious Diseases Society of America guidelines, particularly in patients with severe comorbidity. Therefore, the recommendations concerning blood culture performance in patients with a skin infection should be reconsidered.

Effect of an antibiotic checklist on length of hospital stay and appropriate antibiotic use in adult patients treated with intravenous antibiotics: a stepped wedge cluster randomized trial.

OBJECTIVES: Quality indicators (QIs) have been developed to define appropriate antibiotic use in hospitalized patients. We evaluated whether a checklist based on these QIs affects appropriate antibiotic use and length of hospital stay. METHODS: An antibiotic checklist for patients treated with intravenous antibiotics was introduced in nine Dutch hospitals in a stepped wedge cluster randomized trial. Prophylaxis was excluded. We included a random sample before (baseline), and all eligible patients after (intervention) checklist introduction. Baseline and intervention outcomes were compared. Primary endpoint was length of stay (LOS), analysed by intention to treat. Secondary endpoints, including QI performances, QI sum score (performance on all QIs per patient), and quality of checklist use, were analysed per protocol. RESULTS: Between 1 November 2014 and 1 October 2015 we included 853 baseline and 5354 intervention patients, of whom 993 (19%) had a completed checklist. The LOS did not change (baseline geometric mean 10.0 days (95% CI 8.6-11.5) versus intervention 10.1 days (95% CI 8.9-11.5), p 0.8). QI performances increased between +3.0% and +23.9% per QI, and the percentage of patients with a QI sum score above 50% increased significantly (OR 2.4 (95% CI 2.0-3.0), p<0.001). Higher QI sum scores were significantly associated with shorter LOS. Discordance existed between checklist-answers and actual performance. CONCLUSIONS: Use of an antibiotic checklist resulted in a significant increase in appropriateness of antibiotic use, but not in a reduction of LOS. Low overall checklist completion rates and discordance between checklist-answers and actual provided care might have attenuated the impact of the checklist.

Impact of a multifaceted strategy to improve perioperative diabetes care.

AIMS: To assess the impact of a multifaceted strategy to improve perioperative diabetes care throughout the hospital care pathway. METHODS: We conducted a controlled before-and-after study in six hospitals. The purpose of the strategy was to target four predominant barriers that obstruct optimal care delivery. We provided feedback on baseline indicator performance, developed a multidisciplinary protocol and patient information, and provided professional education. After a 6-month intervention, we determined the performance changes against three outcome indicators and nine process indicators using data on 811 patients with diabetes who underwent major surgery. The progress of the interventions was monitored closely. RESULTS: Two process indicators improved significantly in the intervention hospitals: the proportion of patients for whom glycaemic control had been evaluated preoperatively increased by 9% (P < 0.002) and the proportion of patients with blood glucose measurements within 1 h after surgery increased by 29% (P < 0.0001). Four other process indicators and all three outcome indicators improved more in the intervention hospitals than in the control hospitals, but the differences were not statistically significant. These included the proportion of patients with all glucose values at 6-10 mmol/l (+3%) and the proportion of patients with hyperglycaemia (-8%). The implementation of the multidisciplinary protocol was still ongoing after the 6-month intervention period. CONCLUSIONS: The multifaceted improvement strategy had a limited impact on the quality of perioperative diabetes care. This study demonstrates the complexity of improving perioperative diabetes care throughout the multiprofessional hospital care pathway.

[Better antibiotic use in complicated urinary tract infections; multicentre cluster randomised trial of 2 improvement strategies]. / Beter antibioticagebruik bij gecompliceerde urineweginfecties.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of two strategies to improve antibiotic use in patients with a complicated urinary tract infection. DESIGN: Multicentre cluster randomised unblinded trial. METHOD: The departments of Internal Medicine and Urology from 19 hospitals in the Netherlands took part in this trial. Based on retrospective patient record investigations we performed baseline measurements on the scores of a validated set of quality indicators for antibiotic use in a minimum of 50 patients with a complicated urinary tract infection per department in 2009. A similar post-trial measurement took place in 2012. In 2010 we randomised the hospitals between 2 improvement strategies: a multifaceted strategy that included results of the baseline measurements, education, reminders and assistance with optional improvement interventions, and a competitive feedback strategy, in which the departments only received results of the baseline measurements and non-anonymous results from the other departments in this study arm. The primary outcome measure was improvement of the quality indicator scores. Secondary outcome measures were determinants of improvement of the indicators. (Netherlands Trial Register: NTR1742) RESULTS: The baseline and post-trial measurements were performed on 1,964 patients and 2,027 patients, respectively. Post-trial measurements revealed a significant, but limited, improvement of several indicators compared with baseline measurements. We found no significant difference in improvement between the two strategies for any indicator. The intensity with which the departments implemented improvement strategies was mostly suboptimal, but intensive implementation of a strategy was associated with greater improvement. CONCLUSION: The effectiveness of both improvement strategies was comparable, but limited. For real improvement in antibiotic use in patients with complicated urinary tract infections, improvement interventions should be developed and applied by local professionals themselves.

Applicability of generic quality indicators for appropriate antibiotic use in daily hospital practice: a cross-sectional point-prevalence multicenter study.

The ability to monitor the appropriateness of hospital antibiotic use is a key element of an effective antibiotic stewardship program. A set of 11 generic quality indicators (QIs) was previously developed to assess the quality of antibiotic use in hospitalized adults treated for a bacterial infection. The primary aim of the current study was to assess the clinimetric properties of these QIs (nine process and two structure indicators) in daily clinical practice. In a cross-sectional point-prevalence survey, performed in 2011 and 2012, 1890 inpatients from 22 hospitals in the Netherlands treated with antibiotics for a suspected bacterial infection were included, and data were extracted from medical records. In this cohort we tested the measurability, applicability, reliability, room for improvement and case mix stability of the previously developed QIs. Low applicability (≤10% of reviewed patients) was found for the QIs 'therapeutic drug monitoring', 'adapting antibiotics to renal function' and 'discontinue empirical therapy in case of lack of clinical and/or microbiological evidence of infection'. For the latter, we also found a low inter-observer agreement (kappa <0.4). One QI showed low improvement potential. The remaining seven QIs had sound clinimetric properties. Case-mix correction was necessary for most process QIs. For all QIs, we found ample room for improvement and large variation between hospitals. Establishing the clinimetric properties was essential, as four of the 11 previously selected QIs showed unsatisfactory properties in this practice test. Since the quality of antibiotic use and the process of documenting data is changing over time and may vary per country, QIs should always be tested in practice first.

Practice what you preach? An exploratory multilevel study on rheumatoid arthritis guideline adherence by rheumatologists.

OBJECTIVES: To assess variation in and determinants of rheumatologist guideline adherence in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), in daily practice. METHODS: In this retrospective observational study, guideline adherence in the first year of treatment was assessed for 7 predefined parameters on diagnostics, treatment and follow-up in all adult patients with RA with a first outpatient clinic visit at the study centre, from September 2009 to March 2011. Variation in guideline adherence was assessed on parameter and rheumatologist level. Determinants for guideline adherence were assessed in patients (demographic characteristics, rheumatoid factor (RF) and/or anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide antibody (aCCP) positivity, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, erosive disease, comorbidity and the number of available disease modifying anti-rheumatic drug (DMARD) treatment options) and rheumatologists (demographic and practice characteristics, guideline knowledge and agreement, outcome expectancy, cognitive bias, thinking style, numeracy and personality). RESULTS: A total of 994 visits in 137 patients with RA were reviewed. Variation in guideline adherence among parameters was present (adherence between 21% and 72%), with referral to the physician assistant as lowest scoring and referral to a specialised nurse as highest scoring parameter. Variation in guideline adherence among rheumatologists was also present (adherence between 22% and 100%). Patient sex, the number of DMARD options, presence of erosions, comorbidity, RF/aCCP positivity, type of patient and the rheumatologists' scientific education status were associated with adherence to 1 or more guideline parameters. CONCLUSIONS: Guideline adherence varied considerably among the guideline parameters and rheumatologists, showing that there is room for improvement. Guideline adherence in our sample was related to several patient and rheumatologist determinants.

A survey to identify barriers of implementing an antibiotic checklist.

A checklist is an effective implementation tool, but addressing barriers that might impact on the effectiveness of its use is crucial. In this paper, we explore barriers to the uptake of an antibiotic checklist that aims to improve antibiotic use in daily hospital care. We performed an online questionnaire survey among medical specialists and residents with various professional backgrounds from nine Dutch hospitals. The questionnaire consisted of 23 statements on anticipated barriers hindering the uptake of the checklist. Furthermore, it gave the possibility to add comments. We included 219 completed questionnaires (122 medical specialists and 97 residents) in our descriptive analysis. The top six anticipated barriers included: (1) lack of expectation of improvement of antibiotic use, (2) lack of expected patients' satisfaction by checklist use, (3) lack of feasibility of the checklist, (4) negative previous experiences with other checklists, (5) the complexity of the antibiotic checklist and (6) lack of nurses' expectation of checklist use. Remarkably, 553 comments were made, mostly (436) about the content of the checklist. These insights can be used to improve the specific content of the checklist and to develop an implementation strategy that addresses the identified barriers.

Appropriate antibiotic use for patients with complicated urinary tract infections in 38 Dutch Hospital Departments: a retrospective study of variation and determinants.

BACKGROUND: Appropriate antibiotic use in patients with complicated urinary tract infections can be measured by a valid set of nine quality indicators (QIs). We evaluated the performance of these QIs in a national setting and investigated which determinants influenced appropriate antibiotic use. For the latter, we distinguished patient, department and hospital characteristics, including organizational interventions aimed at improving the quality of antibiotic use (antibiotic stewardship elements). METHODS: A retrospective, observational multicentre study included 1964 patients (58% male sex) with a complicated urinary tract infection treated at Internal Medicine and Urology departments of 19 Dutch university and non-university hospitals. Data of 50 patients per department were extracted from medical charts. QI performance scores were calculated using previously constructed algorithms. Department and hospital characteristics were collected using questionnaires filled in by an internal medicine physician and an urologist. Regression analysis was performed to identify determinants of QI performance. Clustering at department and hospital level was taken into account through inclusion of random effects in a multi-level model. RESULTS: Median QI performance of departments varied between 31% ('Treat urinary tract infection in men according to local guideline') and 77% ('Perform urine culture'). The patient characteristics non-febrile urinary tract infection, female sex and presence of a urinary catheter were negatively associated with performance on many QIs. The presence of an infectious diseases physician and an antibiotic formulary were positively associated with 'Prescribe empirical therapy according to guideline'. No other department or hospital characteristics, including stewardship elements, were consistently associated with better QI performance. CONCLUSIONS: A large inter-department variation was demonstrated in the appropriateness of antibiotic use. In particular certain patient characteristics (more than department or hospital characteristics) influenced the quality of antibiotic use. Some, but not all antibiotic stewardship elements did translate into better QI performance.

Perioperative diabetes care: room for improving the person centredness.

AIMS: Person centredness is an important principle for delivering high-quality diabetes care. In this study, we assess the level of person centredness of current perioperative diabetes care. METHODS: We conducted a survey in six Dutch hospitals, among 690 participants with diabetes who underwent major abdominal, cardiac or large-joint orthopaedic surgery. The survey included questions regarding seven dimensions of person-centred perioperative diabetes care. RESULTS: Complete data were obtained from 298 participants. The survey scores were low for many of the dimensions of person centredness. The dimensions 'information', 'patient involvement' and 'coordination and integration of care' had the lowest scores. Only half the participants had received information about perioperative diabetes treatment, and approximately one-third had received information about the effect of surgery on blood glucose values, target glucose values and glucose measurement times. Similarly, half the participants had an opportunity to ask questions preoperatively, and only one-third of the participants felt involved in the decision-making regarding diabetes treatment. Most participants knew neither the caregiver in charge of perioperative diabetes treatment nor whom to contact in case of diabetes-related problems during their hospital stay. CONCLUSIONS: Current perioperative diabetes care is characterized by a lack of patient information and limited patient involvement. These results indicate that there is ample room for improving the person centredness of perioperative diabetes care.

A tailored implementation strategy to reduce the duration of intravenous antibiotic treatment in community-acquired pneumonia: a controlled before-and-after study.

We previously showed that 40 % of clinically stable patients hospitalised for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) are not switched to oral therapy in a timely fashion because of physicians' barriers. We aimed to decrease this proportion by implementing a novel protocol. In a multi-centre controlled before-and-after study, we evaluated the effect of an implementation strategy tailored to previously identified barriers to an early switch. In three Dutch hospitals, a protocol dictating a timely switch strategy was implemented using educational sessions, pocket reminders and active involvement of nursing staff. Primary outcomes were the proportion of patients switched timely and the duration of intravenous antibiotic therapy. Length of hospital stay (LOS), patient outcome, education effects 6 months after implementation and implementation costs were secondary outcomes. Statistical analysis was performed using mixed-effects models. Prior to implementation, 146 patients were included and, after implementation, 213 patients were included. The case mix was comparable. The implementation did not change the proportion of patients switched on time (66 %). The median duration of intravenous antibiotic administration decreased from 4 days [interquartile range (IQR) 2-5] to 3 days (IQR 2-4), a decrease of 21 % [95 % confidence interval (CI) 11 %; 30 %) in the multi-variable analysis. LOS and patient outcome were comparable before and after implementation. Forty-three percent (56/129) of physicians attended the educational sessions. After 6 months, 24 % (10/42) of the interviewed attendees remembered the protocol's main message. Cumulative implementation costs were 5,798 (20/reduced intravenous treatment day). An implementation strategy tailored to previously identified barriers reduced the duration of intravenous antibiotic administration in hospitalised CAP patients by 1 day, at minimal cost.