What are the nursing competencies related to antimicrobial stewardship and how they have been assessed? Results from an integrative rapid review

Background: Antimicrobial resistance issues, and the consequent demand for antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) programs, need to be investigated urgently and clearly. Considering the large amount of time nurses spend at patients’ bedside, the aim of the present study was to examine recent literature on nursing competency in AMS. Methods: Drawing from Tricco and colleagues’ seven-stage process, a rapid review was performed. MEDLINE, CINAHL and EMBASE databased were searched from December 1st, 2019 until December 31st, 2021. Article screening and study selection were conducted independently by three reviewers. Data were analyzed narratively and categorized adopting an inductive thematic coding. Results: Sixteen studies met the inclusion criteria and were included. Publications were mainly authored in USA (n = 4), Australia and New Zealand (n = 4) and Asia (n = 4), followed by Europe (n = 2) and Africa (n = 2). Ten studies were quantitative in design, followed by qualitative (n = 4) and mixed-methods studies (n = 2). Nursing competency in AMS seems to be influenced by a two-dimensional model: on the one hand, internal factors which consisted in knowledge, attitudes and practices and, on the other hand, external aspects which are at environmental level in terms of structures and processes. Conclusion: This study provided a map of dimensions for researchers and practitioners to consider when planning clinical governance, educational activities, and research programs. Significant opportunities exist for nurses to contribute to practice, education, research, and policy efforts aimed at reducing antimicrobial resistance

Predictors of poor seroconversion and adverse events to SARS-CoV-2 mRNA BNT162b2 vaccine in cancer patients on active treatment

Purpose: Initial findings in patients with cancer suggest a lower seroconversion to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination possibly related to myelo-immunosuppressive therapies. We conducted a prospective study to assess factors predicting poor seroconversion and adverse events following immunisation (AEFI) to the BNT162b2 vaccine in patients on active treatment. Patients and methods: Cancer patients, candidates to two doses of BNT162b2 SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, were enrolled. Patients on active surveillance served as controls. The primary endpoint was poor seroconversion (anti S1/S2 IgG < 25 AU/mL) after 21 days from the second dose. Results: Between March and July 2021, 320 subjects were recruited, and 291 were assessable. The lack of seroconversion at 21 days from the second dose was 1.6% (95% CI, 0.4\u20138.7) on active surveillance, 13.9% (8.2\u201321.6) on chemotherapy, 11.4% (5.1\u201321.3) on hormone therapy, 21.7% (7.5\u201343.7) on targeted therapy and 4.8% (0.12\u201323.8) on immune-checkpoint-inhibitors (ICI). Compared to controls, the risk of no IgG response was greater for chemotherapy (p = 0.033), targeted therapy (0.005) and hormonotherapy (p = 0.051). Lymphocyte count < 1 7 109/L (p = 0.04) and older age (p = 0.03) also significantly predicted poor seroconversion. Overall, 43 patients (14.8%) complained of AEFI, mostly of mild grade. Risk of AEFI was greater in females (p = 0.001) and younger patients (p = 0.009). Conclusion: Chemotherapy, targeted therapy, hormone therapy, lymphocyte count < 1 7 109/L, and increasing age predict poor seroconversion after two doses of BNT162b2 in up to 20% of patients, indicating the need for a third dose and long-term serological testing in non-responders. AEFI occur much more frequently in women and younger subjects who may benefit from preventive medications. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04932863