Impact of an antimicrobial utilization program on antimicrobial use at a large teaching hospital: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Multidisciplinary antimicrobial utilization teams (AUTs) have been proposed as a mechanism for improving antimicrobial use, but data on their efficacy remain limited. OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of an AUT on antimicrobial use at a teaching hospital. DESIGN: Randomized controlled intervention trial. SETTING: A 953-bed, public, university-affiliated, urban teaching hospital. PATIENTS: Patients who were given selected antimicrobial agents (piperacillin-tazobactam, levofloxacin, or vancomycin) by internal medicine ward teams. INTERVENTION: Twelve internal medicine teams were randomly assigned monthly: 6 teams to an intervention group (academic detailing by the AUT) and 6 teams to a control group that was given indication-based guidelines for prescription of broad-spectrum antimicrobials (standard of care), during a 10-month study period. MEASUREMENTS: Proportion of appropriate empirical, definitive (therapeutic), and end (overall) antimicrobial usage. RESULTS: A total of 784 new prescriptions of piperacillin-tazobactam, levofloxacin, and vancomycin were reviewed. The proportion of antimicrobial prescriptions written by the intervention teams that was considered to be appropriate was significantly higher than the proportion of antimicrobial prescriptions written by the control teams that was considered to be appropriate: 82% versus 73% for empirical (risk ratio [RR], 1.14; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-1.24), 82% versus 43% for definitive (RR, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.53-2.33), and 94% versus 70% for end antimicrobial usage (RR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.25-1.43). In multivariate analysis, teams that received feedback from the AUT alone (adjusted RR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.27-1.48) or from both the AUT and the infectious diseases consultation service (adjusted RR, 2.28; 95% CI, 1.64-3.19) were significantly more likely to prescribe end antimicrobial usage appropriately, compared with control teams. CONCLUSIONS: A multidisciplinary AUT that provides feedback to prescribing physicians was an effective method in improving antimicrobial use. Trial registration. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00552838.

Knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors regarding piperacillin-tazobactam prescribing practices: results from a multicenter study.

We investigated knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors of prescribers concerning piperacillin-tazobactam use at 4 Emory University-affiliated hospitals. Discussions during focus groups indicated that the participants' perceived knowledge of clinical criteria for appropriate piperacillin-tazobactam use was inadequate. Retrospective review of medical records identified inappropriate practices. These findings have influenced ongoing interventions aimed at optimizing piperacillin-tazobactam use.

Polymyxin B and doxycycline use in patients with multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii infections in the intensive care unit.

BACKGROUND: Multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii (MDR-Ab) has emerged as an increasingly problematic cause of hospital-acquired infections in the intensive care unit (ICU). MDR-Ab is resistant to most standard antimicrobials but often retains susceptibility to polymyxin B and doxycycline. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of polymyxin B and doxycycline in the treatment of MDR-Ab infections. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was conducted between March 2002 and May 2005 in patients who received doxycycline or polymyxin B for treatment of MDR-Ab infections in ICUs within Grady Memorial Hospital, Atlanta, GA. RESULTS: Thirty-seven patients with MDR-Ab infections were treated with polymyxin B or doxycycline. Median age was 41 years and median ICU length of stay was 18 days prior to acquisition of MDR-Ab. Clinical cure was observed in 22 of 29 (76%) evaluable patients treated with polymyxin B and 2 of 4 (50%) patients treated with doxycycline. In patients with follow-up cultures, microbiological cure was observed in 17 of 21 (81%) patients treated with polymyxin B and 2 of 3 (67%) patients treated with doxycycline. Nephrotoxicity developed in 21% (7 of 33) of patients who received polymyxin B. Neurotoxicity was observed in 2 (6%) patients who received polymyxin B. No adverse reactions were observed with doxycycline. Overall, crude mortality was 27% (9 of 33) and 75% (3 of 4) among those who received polymyxin B and doxycycline, respectively. Three (9%) deaths were attributed to polymyxin B treatment failure, and no deaths were attributed to doxycycline treatment failure. CONCLUSIONS: Polymyxin B was effectively used to treat a substantial proportion of critically ill patients with MDR-Ab infection and was associated with a similar rate of nephrotoxicity as previously reported. Doxycycline monotherapy was used in a limited number of patients for the treatment of MDR-Ab; further evaluation of its efficacy in larger numbers of patients is warranted.