Selection of proxy indicators estimating the appropriateness of antibiotic prescriptions in general practice: a national consensus procedure in France.

Background: GPs are responsible for more than 70% of outpatient antibiotic prescriptions in France. Metrics are important antibiotic stewardship tools that can be used to set targets for improvement and to give feedback to professionals and stakeholders. Objectives: The primary objective of the present study was to select a set of proxy indicators (PIs) based on 10 previously developed PIs, to estimate the appropriateness of antibiotic prescriptions by GPs. The secondary objective was to evaluate the clinimetric properties of the selected PIs. Methods: A RAND-modified Delphi consensus procedure was conducted with a multidisciplinary panel of stakeholders. This procedure consisted of two successive online surveys with a consensus meeting in between. Clinimetric properties (measurability, applicability and potential room for improvement) were evaluated for the PIs selected through the consensus procedure, using 2022 Regional Health Insurance data. Results: Seventeen experts participated in the first-round survey and 14 in the second-round. A final set of 12 PIs was selected. Among the 10 initial PIs, 3 were selected without modification and 7 were modified and selected. Moreover, two newly suggested PIs were selected. Ten of the 12 PIs presented good clinimetric properties. Conclusions: The 12 selected PIs cover the main situations responsible for inappropriate and unnecessary use of antibiotics in general practice. These PIs, easily calculable using routinely collected health insurance reimbursement data, might be used to give feedback to prescribers and stakeholders and help improve antibiotic prescriptions in primary care.

Resident-, prescriber-, and facility-level factors associated with antibiotic use in long-term care facilities: a systematic review of quantitative studies.

BACKGROUND: Antimicrobial stewardship programmes are needed in long-term care facilities (LTCFs) to tackle antimicrobial resistance. We aimed to identify factors associated with antibiotic use in LTCFs. Such information would be useful to guide antimicrobial stewardship programmes. METHOD: We conducted a systematic review of studies retrieved from PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, APA PsycArticles, APA PsycINFO, APA PsycTherapy, ScienceDirect and Web of Science. We included quantitative studies that investigated factors associated with antibiotic use (i.e., antibiotic prescribing by health professionals, administration by LTCF staff, or use by residents). Participants were LTCF residents, their family, and/or carers. We performed a qualitative narrative synthesis of the findings. RESULTS: Of the 7,591 screened records, we included 57 articles. Most studies used a longitudinal design (n = 34/57), investigated resident-level (n = 29/57) and/or facility-level factors (n = 32/57), and fewer prescriber-level ones (n = 8/57). Studies included two types of outcome: overall volume of antibiotic prescriptions (n = 45/57), inappropriate antibiotic prescription (n = 10/57); two included both types. Resident-level factors associated with a higher volume of antibiotic prescriptions included comorbidities (5 out of 8 studies which investigated this factor found a statistically significant association), history of infection (n = 5/6), potential signs of infection (e.g., fever, n = 4/6), positive urine culture/dipstick results (n = 3/4), indwelling urinary catheter (n = 12/14), and resident/family request for antibiotics (n = 1/1). At the facility-level, the volume of antibiotic prescriptions was positively associated with staff turnover (n = 1/1) and prevalence of after-hours medical practitioner visits (n = 1/1), and negatively associated with LTCF hiring an on-site coordinating physician (n = 1/1). At the prescriber-level, higher antibiotic prescribing was associated with high prescription rate for antibiotics in the previous year (n = 1/1). CONCLUSIONS: Improving infection prevention and control, and diagnostic practices as part of antimicrobial stewardship programmes remain critical steps to reduce antibiotic prescribing in LTCFs. Once results confirmed by further studies, implementing institutional changes to limit staff turnover, ensure the presence of a professional accountable for the antimicrobial stewardship activities, and improve collaboration between LTCFs and external prescribers may contribute to reduce antibiotic prescribing.

WHO's essential medicines and AWaRe: recommendations on first- and second-choice antibiotics for empiric treatment of clinical infections.

The WHO Model List of Essential Medicines (EML) prioritizes medicines that have significant global public health value. The EML can also deliver important messages on appropriate medicine use. Since 2017, in response to the growing challenge of antimicrobial resistance, antibiotics on the EML have been reviewed and categorized into three groups: Access, Watch, and Reserve, leading to a new categorization called AWaRe. These categories were developed taking into account the impact of different antibiotics and classes on antimicrobial resistance and the implications for their appropriate use. The 2023 AWaRe classification provides empirical guidance on 41 essential antibiotics for over 30 clinical infections targeting both the primary health care and hospital facility setting. A further 257 antibiotics not included on the EML have been allocated an AWaRe group for stewardship and monitoring purposes. This article describes the development of AWaRe, focussing on the clinical evidence base that guided the selection of Access, Watch, or Reserve antibiotics as first and second choices for each infection. The overarching objective was to offer a tool for optimizing the quality of global antibiotic prescribing and reduce inappropriate use by encouraging the use of Access antibiotics (or no antibiotics) where appropriate. This clinical evidence evaluation and subsequent EML recommendations are the basis for the AWaRe antibiotic book and related smartphone applications. By providing guidance on antibiotic prioritization, AWaRe aims to facilitate the revision of national lists of essential medicines, update national prescribing guidelines, and supervise antibiotic use. Adherence to AWaRe would extend the effectiveness of current antibiotics while helping countries expand access to these life-saving medicines for the benefit of current and future patients, health professionals, and the environment.

Nursing home nurses' opinions on the potential evolution of their role in antibiotic stewardship: A French national cross-sectional survey.

AIMS: To assess French nursing home nurses' opinions on the potential evolution of their antibiotic stewardship role, facilitators and barriers, and nurses' characteristics associated with their opinion toward new roles regarding antibiotic prescribing. DESIGN: We conducted a cross-sectional study in French nursing homes with ≥20 beds and for which an email address was available in a national database managed by the French government between May and June 2022. METHODS: A self-administered internet-based questionnaire of 43 closed-ended Likert items was sent to directors of eligible nursing homes by email asking them to forward the link to the questionnaire to the nurses and head nurses of their institution. Data analysis included descriptive statistics and χ2 tests. RESULTS: 7215 nursing homes were sent the online questionnaire; 1090 participants completed it partially or totally and 923 fully filled in the questionnaire. A majority of nurses supported strengthening and expanding their antibiotic stewardship role. Regarding new roles, over 70% agreed that nurses could collect urine samples to perform a urine culture on their own initiative, prescribe microbiological laboratory tests, and change the drug formulation or the administration route of the antibiotic prescribed by the general practitioner. One-third declared that they could initiate antibiotics for some infections and/or change the empirical antibiotic treatment prescribed by the general practitioner. Nurses from public nursing homes with connection to a hospital (27.5% vs. >35% for other status) and with recent experience in nursing homes (31% for <5 years of practice vs. 41% for 10 years or more) were less likely to agree to prescribe antibiotics. CONCLUSIONS: This quantitative questionnaire survey identified potential new nurses' roles in antibiotic stewardship that seem to be acceptable and feasible for participants. These new nurses' roles need to be explored in future experimentations before considering implementation. REPORTING METHOD: The study adhered to relevant EQUATOR guidelines and followed the STROBE reporting guidelines. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: A self-administered internet-based questionnaire was sent to directors of eligible nursing homes by email asking them to forward the link to the questionnaire to the nurses and head nurses of their institution. Nurses and head nurses who were interested and willing could complete the questionnaire online partially or fully. TRIAL AND PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: This study is not a clinical trial and is not eligible for trial registration. We used another suitable study registration site, the Center for Open Science.

Impact of a public commitment charter, a non-prescription pad and an antibiotic information leaflet to improve antibiotic prescription among general practitioners: A randomised controlled study.

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the effect of a multifaceted antibiotic stewardship intervention on the overall prescription of systemic antibiotics in primary care. Secondary objectives evaluated the effect on the prescription of broad-spectrum antibiotics and the seasonal variation of both total antibiotic and quinolone prescriptions, as a proxy for unnecessary prescribing. METHODS: This pragmatic, randomised, controlled, before-after intervention study was conducted among general practitioners (GPs) who over prescribe antibiotics in Lorraine, France (Intervention group, n = 109; Control group, n = 236; Before period, 01/10/2017-30/09/2018; After period, 01/10/2018-30/09/2019). The intervention included a public commitment charter, a patient information leaflet and a non-prescription pad. Health Insurance data was obtained to calculate overall and broad-spectrum prescription rate (defined daily doses/1000 consultations) and the seasonal variation of prescriptions (%), by period. The intervention effect was measured with general linear mixed models including three independent variables (group, period and group x period interaction). RESULTS: Overall, compared to the Before period, GPs in both groups prescribed significantly fewer systemic antibiotics (p < 0.001) and broad-spectrum antibiotics (p < 0.001) after the intervention was implemented. However, the group x period interaction did not show any evidence that the intervention had an effect on these outcomes. Nevertheless, the intervention did result in a trend towards less seasonal variation in total systemic antibiotic prescription (p = 0.052). CONCLUSIONS: A tendency towards an effect of the intervention to reduce unnecessary antibiotic prescribing during winter months was observed. No effect was observed on the overall volume of systemic antibiotic prescription. This study invites discussion about the challenges faced when evaluating non-pharmacological interventions in primary care.

Best practice guidance for antibiotic audit and feedback interventions in primary care: a modified Delphi study from the Joint Programming Initiative on Antimicrobial resistance: Primary Care Antibiotic Audit and Feedback Network (JPIAMR-PAAN).

BACKGROUND: Primary care is a critical partner for antimicrobial stewardship efforts given its high human antibiotic usage. Peer comparison audit and feedback (A&F) is often used to reduce inappropriate antibiotic prescribing. The design and implementation of A&F may impact its effectiveness. There are no best practice guidelines for peer comparison A&F in antibiotic prescribing in primary care. OBJECTIVE: To develop best practice guidelines for peer comparison A&F for antibiotic prescribing in primary care in high income countries by leveraging international expertise via the Joint Programming Initiative on Antimicrobial Resistance-Primary Care Antibiotic Audit and Feedback Network. METHODS: We used a modified Delphi process to achieve convergence of expert opinions on best practice statements for peer comparison A&F based on existing evidence and theory. Three rounds were performed, each with online surveys and virtual meetings to enable discussion and rating of each best practice statement. A five-point Likert scale was used to rate consensus with a median threshold score of 4 to indicate a consensus statement. RESULTS: The final set of guidelines include 13 best practice statements in four categories: general considerations (n = 3), selecting feedback recipients (n = 1), data and indicator selection (n = 4), and feedback delivery (n = 5). CONCLUSION: We report an expert-derived best practice recommendations for designing and evaluating peer comparison A&F for antibiotic prescribing in primary care. These 13 statements can be used by A&F designers to optimize the impact of their quality improvement interventions, and improve antibiotic prescribing in primary care.

Towards One Health surveillance of antibiotic resistance: characterisation and mapping of existing programmes in humans, animals, food and the environment in France, 2021.

BackgroundInternational organisations are calling for One Health approaches to tackle antimicrobial resistance. In France, getting an overview of the current surveillance system and its level of integration is difficult due to the diversity of surveillance programmes.AimThis study aimed to map and describe all French surveillance programmes for antibiotic resistance (ABR), antibiotic use (ABU) and antibiotic residues, in humans, animals, food and the environment, in 2021. Another objective was to identify integration points, gaps and overlaps in the system.MethodsWe reviewed the literature for surveillance programmes and their descriptions. To further characterise programmes found, semi-directed interviews were conducted with their coordinators.ResultsIn total 48 programmes in the human (n = 35), animal (n = 12), food (n = 3) and/or the environment (n = 1) sectors were identified; 35 programmes focused on ABR, 14 on ABU and two on antibiotic residues. Two programmes were cross-sectoral. Among the 35 ABR programmes, 23 collected bacterial isolates. Bacteria most targeted were Escherichia coli (n = 17 programmes), Klebsiella pneumoniae (n = 13), and Staphylococcus aureus (n = 12). Extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing E. coli was monitored by most ABR programmes (15 of 35) in humans, animals and food, and is a good candidate for integrated analyses. ABU indicators were highly variable. Areas poorly covered were the environmental sector, overseas territories, antibiotic-resistant-bacterial colonisation in humans and ABU in companion animals.ConclusionThe French surveillance system appears extensive but has gaps and is highly fragmented. We believe our mapping will interest policymakers and surveillance stakeholders. Our methodology may inspire other countries considering One Health surveillance of ABR.

International Consensus on a Dental Antibiotic Stewardship Core Outcome Set.

INTRODUCTION: Antibiotic resistance is a global health crisis. Ensuring responsible, appropriate use (stewardship) is an important for keeping antibiotics working as long as possible. Around 10% of antibiotics across health care are prescribed by oral health care professionals, with high rates of unnecessary use. To maximise the value from research to optimise antibiotic use in dentistry, this study developed international consensus on a core outcome set for dental antibiotic stewardship. METHODS: Candidate outcomes were sourced from a literature review. International participants were recruited via professional bodies, patient organisations, and social media, with at least 30 dentists, academics, and patient contributors in total. Outcomes scored "critical for inclusion" by >70% of the participants (dentists, academics, and patients) after 2 Delphi rounds were included in the core outcome set following a final consensus meeting. The study protocol was registered with the COMET Initiative and published in BMC Trials. RESULTS: A total of 33 participants from 15 countries, including 8 low- and middle-income countries, completed both rounds of the Delphi study. Antibiotic use outcomes (eg, appropriateness of prescribing), adverse or poor outcomes (eg, complications from disease progression), and a patient-reported outcome were included in the final, agreed core set. Outcomes relating to quality, time, and cost were not included. CONCLUSIONS: This core outcome set for dental antibiotic stewardship represents the minimum which future studies of antibiotic stewardship in dentistry should report. By supporting researchers to design and report their studies in a way meaningful to multiple stakeholders and enabling international comparisons, the oral health profession's contribution to global efforts to tackle antibiotic resistance can be further improved.

Impact of selective reporting of antibiotic susceptibility testing results for urinary tract infections in the outpatient setting: a prospective controlled before-after intervention study.

OBJECTIVES: The use of selective reporting of antibiotic susceptibility testing (AST) results is a recommended antimicrobial stewardship strategy to improve the appropriateness of antibiotic prescriptions. We conducted a large, pragmatic, prospective, multicentre, controlled (selective reporting versus complete reporting) before-after intervention study to assess the impact of selective reporting of AST results for Escherichia coli-positive urine cultures on the prescription of broad-spectrum antibiotics carrying a higher risk of selection of resistance (i.e. amoxicillin-clavulanate, third-generation cephalosporins, and quinolones) in the outpatient setting. We also looked for possible unintended clinical consequences of the intervention leading to consultations and/or hospitalizations. METHODS: We compared two groups of laboratories located in a French region. We collected data from the health insurance databases before (2017) and after the implementation of the intervention (2019). The primary outcome was the prescription proportion of broad-spectrum antibiotics. RESULTS: We included 42,956 Escherichia coli-positive urine cultures with AST. The decrease in the proportion of broad-spectrum antibiotic prescriptions between 2017 and 2019 was significantly higher for selective reporting of AST, attributable to a decrease in the prescription proportion of third-generation cephalosporins (-8.5% for selective reporting versus -0.1% for complete reporting, p < 0.001). This impact was more marked for targeted therapy and female patients. Requests from clinicians for the complete reporting of AST results were infrequent (1.2% of all the selective AST results reported in 2019). No unintended consequences were observed. DISCUSSION: The results showed a positive impact of the selective reporting of AST results, but room for improvement is still important.

Nurses' perceptions of the potential evolution of their role in antibiotic stewardship in nursing homes: a French qualitative study.

Background: In nursing homes, infections and antibiotic prescriptions are frequent. Nursing home nurses (NHNs) and advanced practice registered nurses (APRNs) could promote antibiotic stewardship (ABS). Few studies have explored nurses' knowledge, perceptions and practices towards ABS in nursing homes and none has investigated the potential evolution of their roles. Objectives: To explore French nurses' perceptions on ABS, current and future potential roles in ABS in nursing homes, as well as facilitators and barriers. Methods: We conducted a qualitative study in north-eastern France between October 2020 and March 2021 using semi-structured individual interviews with NHNs and a focus group with APRNs. Transcripts of the interviews were analysed using a thematic analysis. Results: Twenty NHNs and seven APRNs participated. They were aware of antibiotic misuse and potential adverse events but lacked knowledge on some ABS aspects. NHNs' current ABS roles ranged from the detection of clinical infectious signs to clinical monitoring of residents, with some heterogeneity between nurses. They had positive opinions towards playing a more prominent role in ABS. In the future, with additional training, changes in the legislative framework and greater multidisciplinary teamwork, NHNs thought they could prescribe laboratory microbiological analyses and some targeted antibiotic treatments. APRNs thought they could prescribe first-line antibiotics for urinary tract infections. Conclusions: French NHNs' current ABS roles could be expanded and new roles might be considered while taking into account several facilitators and barriers. According to APRNs, they could help to compensate for the limited presence of doctors in nursing homes and develop infectious diseases skills.

Selective reporting of antibiotic susceptibility testing results for urine cultures: feasibility and acceptability by general practitioners and laboratory professionals in France.

Background: Selective reporting of antibiotic susceptibility testing (AST) is a recommended antibiotic stewardship strategy, aiming at reducing inappropriate antibiotic prescriptions. Objectives: Our objectives were to evaluate (i) the feasibility of the implementation of selective reporting of AST for urine cultures for laboratory professionals; and (ii) its acceptability by prescribers and laboratory professionals, to explore facilitators and barriers to its potential implementation on a national scale. Methods: As part of the 'ANTIBIO-ciblés' interventional study (north-eastern France, August 2018-December 2019), we prospectively collected quantitative data on all resources dedicated by the laboratories of the intervention group to implement selective reporting of AST for Escherichia coli-positive urine cultures, and on the numbers and reasons of complete reporting of AST the prescribers requested to the laboratories. We also collected qualitative data using semi-structured interviews and focus groups of GPs and laboratory professionals. Results: The implementation of selective reporting of AST required around 80 h and cost 23 000 euros. All interviewed professionals were favourable toward the principle of this tool. Most of them found it clear, simple and useful to improve the appropriateness of antibiotic prescriptions and reduce antibiotic resistance. Its major constraint was the necessity for GPs to call the laboratory to obtain the complete reporting of AST, but the number of requests was actually low (1.2% of all selective reporting of AST). Conclusions: Selective reporting of AST resulted in reasonable human and financial costs, and was well accepted by both GPs and laboratory professionals.

Characteristics of dentists and patients associated with appropriate antibiotic prescriptions by French dentists: a cross-sectional study using Health Insurance databases.

BACKGROUND: The use of antibiotics in dental care is often unnecessary or inappropriate. Our objectives were to identify (i) Clusters of dentists grouped according to their appropriateness score based on proxy indicators' results; and (ii) Dentists' and patients' characteristics associated with the appropriateness of antibiotic prescriptions. METHODS: We used data of the Health Insurance reimbursement databases on antibiotics prescribed in 2019 by general dental practitioners of the Grand Est region in France. The appropriateness of antibiotic prescriptions was estimated by the results of recently published proxy indicators. We conducted a cluster analysis according to an appropriateness score calculated for each dentist, using the Ward method. We then conducted bivariate and multivariable analyses to identify characteristics associated with these clusters. RESULTS: We included 3,014 dentists, who prescribed 373,975 antibiotics in 2019, and which were grouped into three clusters: average practices (n = 1,241), better (n = 686), and worse (n = 1,087) than average practices. Overall, dentists had more appropriate prescription practices when they were male (OR for belonging to cluster with "worse than average practices" = 1.37 (p = 0.003) for female), having a predominant surgery practice (p = 0.028) in the Lorraine area (p < 0.0001) for less years (p = 0.0002), when they had healthier patients (i.e., younger, with no chronic diseases, and who received less procedures), and when they had a more prudent use of drugs in general (i.e., less prescriptions of drugs, antibiotics, and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory). CONCLUSIONS: We identified clusters and characteristics associated with the appropriateness of antibiotic prescriptions made by dentists, which might help guiding antimicrobial stewardship interventions.

Outcomes of octogenarians and nonagenarians with Pseudomonas aeruginosa bacteremia: a multicenter retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: P. aeruginosa bacteremia is a common and severe infection carrying high mortality in older adults. We aimed to evaluate outcomes of P. aeruginosa bacteremia among old adults (≥ 80 years). METHODS: We included the 464/2394 (19%) older adults from a retrospective multinational (9 countries, 25 centers) cohort study of individuals hospitalized with P. aeruginosa bacteremia. Bivariate and multivariable logistic regression models were used to evaluate risk factors for 30-day mortality among older adults. RESULTS: Among 464 adults aged ≥ 80 years, the mean age was 84.61 (SD 3.98) years, and 274 (59%) were men. Compared to younger patients, ≥ 80 years adults had lower Charlson score; were less likely to have nosocomial acquisition; and more likely to have urinary source. Thirty-day mortality was 30%, versus 27% among patients 65-79 years (n = 894) and 25% among patients < 65 years (n = 1036). Multivariate analysis for predictors of mortality among patients ≥ 80 years, demonstrated higher SOFA score (odds ratio [OR] 1.36, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.23-1.51, p < 0.001), corticosteroid therapy (OR 3.15, 95% CI: 1.24-8.01, p = 0.016) and hospital acquired P. aeruginosa bacteremia (OR 2.30, 95% CI: 1.33-3.98, p = 0.003) as predictors. Appropriate empirical therapy within 24 h, type of definitive anti-pseudomonal drug, and type of regimen (monotherapy or combination) were not associated with 30-day mortality. CONCLUSIONS: In older adults with P. aeruginosa bacteremia, background conditions, place of acquisition, and disease severity are associated with mortality, rather than the antimicrobial regimen. In this regard, preventive efforts and early diagnosis before organ failure develops might be beneficial for improving outcomes.

Design of proxy indicators estimating the appropriateness of antibiotics prescribed by French dentists: a cross-sectional study based on reimbursement data.

Background - The literature shows that the prescription of antibiotics in dental care is often unnecessary or inappropriate. Indicators estimating the appropriateness of antibiotics prescribed by dentists based on routine databases are however not available in the literature. Our objectives were to: (i) design proxy indicators estimating the appropriateness of antibiotics prescribed by dentists; (ii) evaluate their clinimetric properties; and (iii) provide results for these proxy indicators for dentists located in a north-eastern French region.Methods - We selected and adapted proxy indicators from the literature. Using 2019 Regional Health Insurance data, we evaluated the proxy indicators' clinimetric properties (measurability, applicability, and potential room for improvement), their results with performance scores (% of dentists who reached the target value), and the case-mix stability.Results - We included 3,014 general dental practitioners, who prescribed a total of 373,975 antibiotics to 308,123 patients in 2019. We identified four proxy indicators estimating antibiotic prescribing appropriateness in dental care. All proxy indicators had good clinimetric properties. Performance scores were generally low (10.5 to 73.0%, depending on the indicator), suggesting an important room for improvement. These results showed large variations between dentists (large interquartile ranges) and according to the patients' characteristics (case-mix stability).Conclusion - These four proxy indicators might be used to guide antibiotic stewardship interventions in dental care.

Regional and national antimicrobial stewardship activities: a survey from the Joint Programming Initiative on Antimicrobial Resistance-Primary Care Antibiotic Audit and Feedback Network (JPIAMR-PAAN).

Background: Antibiotic overuse and misuse in primary care are common, highlighting the importance of antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) efforts in this setting. Audit and feedback (A&F) interventions can improve professional practice and performance in some settings. Objectives and methods: To leverage the expertise from international members of the Joint Programming Initiative on Antimicrobial Resistance - Primary care Antibiotic Audit and feedback Network (JPIAMR-PAAN). Network members all have experience of designing and delivering A&F interventions to reduce inappropriate antibiotic prescribing in primary care settings. We aim to introduce the network and explore ongoing A&F activities in member regions. An online survey was administered to all network members to collect regional information. Results: Fifteen respondents from 11 countries provided information on A&F activities in their country, and national/regional antibiotic stewardship programmes or policies. Most countries use electronic medical records as the primary data source, antibiotic appropriateness as the main outcome of feedback, and target GPs as the prescribers of interest. Funding sources varied across countries, which could influence the frequency and quality of A&F interventions. Nine out of 11 countries reported having a national antibiotic stewardship programme or policy, which aim to provide systematic support to ongoing AMS efforts and aid sustainability. Conclusions: The survey identified gaps and opportunities for AMS efforts that include A&F across member countries in Europe, Canada and Australia. JPIAMR-PAAN will continue to leverage its members to produce best practice resources and toolkits for antibiotic A&F interventions in primary care settings and identify research priorities.

Development of an international survey tool to measure confidence and current antimicrobial stewardship practices of hospital pharmacists.

BACKGROUND: Pharmacists are identified as key members of hospital antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) teams in international guidelines. Developing an international standardized tool to measure hospital pharmacists' confidence and practices of AMS will encourage knowledge sharing and better networking between hospital pharmacists internationally. OBJECTIVES: To develop a survey tool that can be used internationally to assess pharmacists' knowledge, confidence, perceived barriers and current AMS practices. METHODS: A project team was formed to refine the survey tool that was initially used in a previous survey study. Following revision by the project team, a revised survey tool was sent to the ESCMID Study Group for Antimicrobial Stewardship (ESGAP). Feedback from the ESGAP members was considered by the project team to finalize the survey tool. RESULTS: A total of 88 changes were made to the survey tool after revision by the project team. A total of 43/216 (19.9%) of ESGAP members provided feedback on the survey tool, which led to a further 19 revisions. ESGAP members were agreeable to the questions in the survey tool, with >50% agreeing that each question was suitable. The final survey tool consisted of 42 questions, reduced from 72 questions in the original survey. CONCLUSIONS: An international survey tool to measure hospital pharmacists' confidence and practices of AMS was developed. This tool will help the wider hospital pharmacy community in conducting local studies on current AMS practices and to identify areas where further support is needed. Use of a standardized survey tool will also allow individual regions/countries to compare their data with other countries to identify potential quality improvement programmes.

The WHO essential medicines list AWaRe book: from a list to a quality improvement system.

Antibiotics are often prescribed inappropriately, either when they are not necessary or with an unnecessarily broad spectrum of activity. AWaRe (AccessWatchReserve) is a system developed by WHO to classify antibiotics based on their spectrum of activity and potential for favouring the development of antibiotic resistance (Access: narrow spectrum/low potential for resistance; Watch: broader spectrum/higher potential for resistance; Reserve: last resort antibiotics to use very selectively). The WHO target is that by 2023, at least 60% of prescribed antibiotics globally should be from the Access category. The WHO AWaRe Book aims to improve empiric antibiotic prescribing by providing simple guidance for common infections based on the principles of AWaRe in alignment with the Model Lists of Essential Medicines for adults and children.

Duration of Treatment for Pseudomonas aeruginosa Bacteremia: a Retrospective Study.

INTRODUCTION: There is no consensus regarding optimal duration of antibiotic therapy for Pseudomonas aeruginosa bacteremia. We aimed to evaluate the impact of short antibiotic course. METHODS: We present a retrospective multicenter study including patients with P. aeruginosa bacteremia during 2009-2015. We evaluated outcomes of patients treated with short (6-10 days) versus long (11-15 days) antibiotic courses. The primary outcome was a composite of 30-day mortality or bacteremia recurrence and/or persistence. Univariate and inverse probability treatment-weighted (IPTW) adjusted multivariate analysis for the primary outcome was performed. To avoid immortal time bias, the landmark method was used. RESULTS: We included 657 patients; 273 received a short antibiotic course and 384 a long course. There was no significant difference in baseline characteristics of patients. The composite primary outcome occurred in 61/384 patients in the long-treatment group (16%) versus 32/273 in the short-treatment group (12%) (p = 0.131). Mortality accounted for 41/384 (11%) versus 25/273 (9%) of cases, respectively. Length of hospital stay was significantly shorter in the short group [median 13 days, interquartile range (IQR) 9-21 days, versus median 15 days, IQR 11-26 days, p = 0.002]. Ten patients in the long group discontinued antibiotic therapy owing to adverse events, compared with none in the short group. On univariate and multivariate analyses, duration of therapy was not associated with the primary outcome. CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective study, 6-10 days of antibiotic course for P. aeruginosa bacteremia were as effective as longer courses in terms of survival and recurrence. Shorter therapy was associated with reduced length of stay and less drug discontinuation.