Systematic review of high-dose amikacin regimens for the treatment of Gram-negative infections based on EUCAST dosing recommendations.

BACKGROUND: Updated European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST) amikacin breakpoints for Enterobacterales and Pseudomonas aeruginosa included revised dosing recommendations of 25-30 mg/kg to achieve key pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic parameters, higher than recommended in the British National Formulary. The objectives of this review were to identify clinical evidence for high-dose amikacin regimens and to determine drug exposures that are related to adverse events and toxicity. METHODS: The literature search was conducted in October 2021 and updated in May 2022 using electronic databases for any study reporting adult participants treated with amikacin at doses ≥20 mg/kg/day. Reference lists of included papers were also screened for potential papers. Data were extracted for pharmacokinetic parameters and clinical outcomes, presented in a summary table and consolidated narratively. Meta-analysis was not possible. Each study was assessed for bias before, during and after the intervention using the ROBINS-I tool. RESULTS: Nine studies (total 501 participants in 10 reports) were identified and included, eight of which were observational studies. Assessment of bias showed substantial flaws. Dosing regimens ranged from 25 to 30 mg/kg/day. Six studies adjusted the dose in obesity when participants had a body mass index of ≥30 kg/m2. Target peak serum concentrations ranged from 60 mg/L to 80 mg/L and 59.6-81.8% of patients achieved these targets, but there was no information on clinical outcomes. Two studies reported the impact of high-dose amikacin on renal function. No studies reporting auditory or vestibular toxicity were identified. CONCLUSION: All included papers were limited by a significant risk of bias, while methodological and reporting heterogeneity made drawing conclusions challenging. Lack of information on the impact on renal function or ototoxicity means high-dose regimens should be used cautiously in older people. There is a need for a consensus guideline for high-dose amikacin to be written. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO (CRD42021250022).

Implementation of the national antimicrobial stewardship competencies for UK undergraduate healthcare professional education within undergraduate pharmacy programmes: a survey of UK schools of pharmacy.

Background: Pharmacists play a key role in antimicrobial stewardship (AMS). Consensus-based national AMS competencies for undergraduate healthcare professionals in the UK reflect the increasing emphasis on competency-based healthcare professional education. However, the extent to which these are included within undergraduate pharmacy education programmes in the UK is unknown. Objectives: To explore which of the AMS competencies are delivered, including when and at which level, within UK undergraduate MPharm programmes. Methods: A cross-sectional online questionnaire captured the level of study of the MPharm programme in which each competency was taught, the method of delivery and assessment of AMS education, and examples of student feedback. Results: Ten institutions completed the survey (33% response rate). No institution reported covering all 54 AMS competencies and 5 of these were taught at half or fewer of the institutions. Key gaps were identified around taking samples, communication, outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy and surgical prophylaxis. The minimum time dedicated to AMS teaching differed between institutions (range 9-119 h), teaching was generally through didactic methods, and assessment was generally through knowledge recall and objective structured clinical examinations. Feedback from students suggests they find AMS and antimicrobial resistance (AMR) to be complex yet important topics. Conclusions: UK schools of pharmacy should utilize the competency framework to identify gaps in their AMS, AMR and infection teaching. To prepare newly qualified pharmacists to be effective at delivering AMS and prescribing antimicrobials, schools of pharmacy should utilize more simulated environments and clinical placements for education and assessment of AMS.

Antibiotic review kit for hospitals (ARK-Hospital): a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Strategies to reduce antibiotic overuse in hospitals depend on prescribers taking decisions to stop unnecessary antibiotic use. There is scarce evidence for how to support these decisions. We evaluated a multifaceted behaviour change intervention (ie, the antibiotic review kit) designed to reduce antibiotic use among adult acute general medical inpatients by increasing appropriate decisions to stop antibiotics at clinical review. METHODS: We performed a stepped-wedge, cluster (hospital)-randomised controlled trial using computer-generated sequence randomisation of eligible hospitals in seven calendar-time blocks in the UK. Hospitals were eligible for inclusion if they admitted adult non-elective general or medical inpatients, had a local representative to champion the intervention, and could provide the required study data. Hospital clusters were randomised to an implementation date occurring at 1-2 week intervals, and the date was concealed until 12 weeks before implementation, when local preparations were designed to start. The intervention effect was assessed using data from pseudonymised routine electronic health records, ward-level antibiotic dispensing, Clostridioides difficile tests, prescription audits, and an implementation process evaluation. Co-primary outcomes were monthly antibiotic defined daily doses per adult acute general medical admission (hospital-level, superiority) and all-cause mortality within 30 days of admission (patient level, non-inferiority margin of 5%). Outcomes were assessed in the modified intention-to-treat population (ie, excluding sites that withdrew before implementation). Intervention effects were assessed by use of interrupted time series analyses within each site, estimating overall effects through random-effects meta-analysis, with heterogeneity across prespecified potential modifiers assessed by use of meta-regression. This trial is completed and is registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN12674243. FINDINGS: 58 hospital organisations expressed an interest in participating. Three pilot sites implemented the intervention between Sept 25 and Nov 20, 2017. 43 further sites were randomised to implement the intervention between Feb 12, 2018, and July 1, 2019, and seven sites withdrew before implementation. 39 sites were followed up for at least 14 months. Adjusted estimates showed reductions in total antibiotic defined daily doses per acute general medical admission (-4·8% per year, 95% CI -9·1 to -0·2) following the intervention. Among 7 160 421 acute general medical admissions, the ARK intervention was associated with an immediate change of -2·7% (95% CI -5·7 to 0·3) and sustained change of 3·0% (-0·1 to 6·2) in adjusted 30-day mortality. INTERPRETATION: The antibiotic review kit intervention resulted in sustained reductions in antibiotic use among adult acute general medical inpatients. The weak, inconsistent intervention effects on mortality are probably explained by the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Hospitals should use the antibiotic review kit to reduce antibiotic overuse. FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health and Care Research.

An overview of antibiotic therapy.

Antibiotics are one of the most widely prescribed group of drugs in the UK. However, their widespread use has resulted in antibiotic resistance and unnecessary prescribing. This article provides an overview of antibiotic therapy, including the principles and modes of action of drug treatment, prescribing criteria and the issue of antibiotic resistance.