Empirical use of antibiotics and adjustment of empirical antibiotic therapies in a university hospital: a prospective observational study

BACKGROUND: Several strategies to optimise the use of antibiotics have been developed. Most of these interventions can be classified as educational or restrictive. Restrictive measures are considered to be more effective, but the enforcement of these measures may be difficult and lead to conflicts with prescribers. Any intervention should be aimed at targets with the highest impact on antibiotic prescribing. The aim of the present study was to assess the adequacy of empirical and adjusted antibiotic therapies in a Swiss university hospital where no antibiotic use restrictions are enforced, and to identify risk factors for inadequate treatment and targets for intervention. METHODS: A prospective observational study was performed during 9 months. All patients admitted through the emergency department who received an antibiotic therapy within 24 hours of admission were included. Data on demographic characteristics, diagnoses, comorbidities, systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) parameters, microbiological tests, and administered antibiotics were collected prospectively. Antibiotic therapy was considered adequate if spectrum, dose, application modus, and duration of therapy were appropriate according to local recommendations or published guidelines. RESULTS: 2943 admitted patients were evaluated. Of these, 572 (19.4%) received antibiotics within 24 hours and 539 (94%) were analysed in detail. Empirical antibiotic therapy was inadequate in 121 patients (22%). Initial therapy was adjusted in 168 patients (31%). This adjusted antibiotic therapy was inadequate in 46 patients (27%). The main reason for inadequacy was the use of antibiotics with unnecessarily broad spectrum (24% of inadequate empirical, and 52% of inadequate adjusted therapies). In 26% of patients with inadequate adjusted therapy, antibiotics used were either ineffective against isolated pathogenic bacteria or antibiotic therapy was continued despite negative results of microbiological investigations. CONCLUSION: The rate of inadequate antibiotic therapies was similar to the rates reported from other institutions despite the absence of a restrictive antibiotic policy. Surprisingly, adjusted antibiotic therapies were more frequently inappropriate than empirical therapies. Interventions aiming at improving antibiotic prescribing should focus on both initial empirical therapy and streamlining and adjustment of therapy once microbiological results become available

Randomised primary health center based interventions to improve the diagnosis and treatment of undifferentiated fever and dengue in Vietnam

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Fever is a common reason for attending primary health facilities in Vietnam. Response of health care providers to patients with fever commonly consists of making a presumptive diagnosis and proposing corresponding treatment. In Vietnam, where malaria was brought under control, viral infections, notably dengue, are the main causes of undifferentiated fever but they are often misdiagnosed and inappropriately treated with antibiotics.</p> <p>This study investigate if educating primary health center (PHC) staff or introducing rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) improve diagnostic resolution and accuracy for acute undifferentiated fever (AUF) and reduce prescription of antibiotics and costs for patients.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>In a PHC randomized intervention study in southern Vietnam, the presumptive diagnoses for AUF patients were recorded and confirmed by serology on paired (acute and convalescence) sera. After one year, PHCs were randomized to four intervention arms: training on infectious diseases (A), the provision of RDTs (B), the combination (AB) and control (C). The intervention lasted from 2002 until 2006.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The frequency of the non-etiologic diagnosis "undifferentiated fever" decreased in group AB, and - with some delay- also in group B. The diagnosis "dengue" increased in group AB, but only temporarily, although dengue was the most common cause of fever. A correct diagnosis for dengue initially increased in groups AB and B but only for AB this was sustained. Antibiotics prescriptions increased in group C. During intervention it initially declined in AB with a tendency to increase afterwards; in B it gradually declined. There was a substantial increase of patients' costs in B.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The introduction of RDTs for infectious diseases such as dengue, through free market principles, does improve the quality of the diagnosis and decreases the prescription of antibiotics at the PHC level. However, the effect is more sustainable in combination with training; without it RDTs lead to an excess of costs.</p

Can antibiotic prescriptions in respiratory tract infections be improved? A cluster-randomized educational intervention in general practice – The Prescription Peer Academic Detailing (Rx-PAD) Study [NCT00272155]

BACKGROUND: More than half of all antibiotic prescriptions in general practice are issued for respiratory tract infections (RTIs), despite convincing evidence that many of these infections are caused by viruses. Frequent misuse of antimicrobial agents is of great global health concern, as we face an emerging worldwide threat of bacterial antibiotic resistance. There is an increasing need to identify determinants and patterns of antibiotic prescribing, in order to identify where clinical practice can be improved. METHODS/DESIGN: Approximately 80 peer continuing medical education (CME) groups in southern Norway will be recruited to a cluster randomized trial. Participating groups will be randomized either to an intervention- or a control group. A multifaceted intervention has been tailored, where key components are educational outreach visits to the CME-groups, work-shops, audit and feedback. Prescription Peer Academic Detailers (Rx-PADs), who are trained GPs, will conduct the educational outreach visits. During these visits, evidence-based recommendations of antibiotic prescriptions for RTIs will be presented and software will be handed out for installation in participants PCs, enabling collection of prescription data. These data will subsequently be linked to corresponding data from the Norwegian Prescription Database (NorPD). Individual feedback reports will be sent all participating GPs during and one year after the intervention. Main outcomes are baseline proportion of inappropriate antibiotic prescriptions for RTIs and change in prescription patterns compared to baseline one year after the initiation of the tailored pedagogic intervention. DISCUSSION: Improvement of prescription patterns in medical practice is a challenging task. A thorough evaluation of guidelines for antibiotic treatment in RTIs may impose important benefits, whereas inappropriate prescribing entails substantial costs, as well as undesirable consequences like development of antibiotic resistance. Our hypothesis is that an educational intervention program will be effective in improving prescription patterns by reducing the total number of antibiotic prescriptions, as well as reducing the amount of broad-spectrum antibiotics, with special emphasis on macrolides

Organization and training at national level of antimicrobial stewardship and infection control activities in Europe: an ESCMID cross-sectional survey

Antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) and Infection prevention and control (IPC) are two key complementary strategies that combat development and spread of antimicrobial resistance. The ESGAP (ESCMID Study Group for AMS), EUCIC (European Committee on Infection Control) and TAE (Trainee Association of ESCMID) investigated how AMS and IPC activities and training are organized, if present, at national level in Europe. From February 2018 to May 2018, an internet-based cross-sectional survey was conducted through a 36-item questionnaire, involving up to three selected respondents per country, from 38 European countries in total (including Israel), belonging to the ESGAP/EUCIC/TAE networks. All 38 countries participated with at least one respondent, and a total of 81 respondents. Education and involvement in AMS programmes were mandatory during the postgraduate training of clinical microbiology and infectious diseases specialists in up to one-third of countries. IPC was acknowledged as a specialty in 32% of countries. Only 32% of countries had both guidance and national requirements regarding AMS programmes, in contrast to 61% for IPC. Formal national staffing standards for AMS and IPC hospital-based activities were present in 24% and 63% of countries, respectively. The backgrounds of professionals responsible for AMS and IPC programmes varied tremendously between countries. The organization and training of AMS and IPC in Europe are heterogeneous and national requirements for activities are frequently lacking

Legal framework of antimicrobial stewardship in hospitals (LEASH): a European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (ESCMID) cross-sectional international survey

Antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) is the cornerstone activity in the combat against antimicrobial resistance. In order to ensure sustainable deployment and development of AMS, a strategic and regulatory framework needs to be provided by national healthcare authorities. Experts from 32 European countries, Israel and Turkey were invited to participate in a cross-sectional internet-based survey from October 2016 to May 2017 on the legal framework and mandatory components (structures, activities) of AMS in hospitals, i.e. components required by legislation or regulations. We collected data from 25 countries and two regions (in countries with federal health administration). Laws regulating AMS existed in seven countries and one region. Other health ministry regulations were applicable in 13 countries and one region. National strategies and/or action plans approved by ministries of health were in place in 13 countries and one region. Conversely, five countries and one region had no regulation of AMS in hospitals. Funding for AMS in hospitals was provided in five countries and one region. Eight countries and one region reported mandatory AMS structures and activities complying with the Transatlantic Taskforce on Antimicrobial Resistance (TATFAR) structure, policy and practice indicators. In 10/27 cases, however, the mandatory AMS activities were not being fully carried out. The survey showed heterogeneous legal frameworks for AMS in hospitals, and in many countries it was even lacking. The situation may be critical in countries with poor control of antimicrobial use and resistance. Recent international initiatives calling on policy-makers to address the threat of antimicrobial resistance could yield improvement