Knowledge, attitudes and perceptions of Latin American healthcare workers relating to antibiotic stewardship and antibiotic use: a cross-sectional multi-country study

Abstract Background The burden of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in Latin America is high. Little is known about healthcare workers’ (HCWs) knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions of antimicrobial stewardship (AS), AMR, and antibiotic use (AU) in the region. Methods HCWs from 42 hospitals from 5 Latin American countries were invited to take an electronic, voluntary, anonymous survey regarding knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions of AS, AMR, and AU between March–April 2023. Findings Overall, 996 HCWs completed the survey (52% physicians, 32% nurses, 11% pharmacists, 3% microbiologists, and 2% “other”). More than 90% of respondents indicated optimizing AU was a priority at their healthcare facility (HCF), 69% stated the importance of AS was communicated at their HCF, and 23% were unfamiliar with the term “antibiotic stewardship”. Most (> 95%) respondents acknowledged that appropriate AU can reduce AMR; however, few thought AU (< 30%) or AMR (< 50%) were a problem in their HCF. Lack of access to antibiogram and to locally endorsed guidelines was reported by 51% and 34% of HCWs, respectively. Among prescribers, 53% did not consider non-physicians’ opinions to make antibiotic-related decisions, 22% reported not receiving education on how to select antibiotics based on culture results and 60% stated patients and families influence their antibiotic decisions. Conclusions Although HCWs perceived improving AU as a priority, they did not perceive AU or AMR as a problem in their HCF. AS opportunities include improved access to guidelines, access to AMR/AU data, teamwork, and education on AS for HCWs and patients and families

Characteristics, management, and outcomes of patients with left‐sided infective endocarditis complicated by heart failure: a substudy of the ESC‐EORP EURO‐ENDO (European infective endocarditis) registry

International audienc

Predictors of embolism and death in left-sided infective endocarditis: the European Society of Cardiology EURObservational Research Programme European Infective Endocarditis registry

International audienceBackground and Aims Even though vegetation size in infective endocarditis (IE) has been associated with embolic events (EEs) and mortality risk, it is unclear whether vegetation size associated with these potential outcomes is different in left-sided IE (LSIE). This study aimed to seek assessing the vegetation cut-off size as predictor of EE or 30-day mortality for LSIE and to determine risk predictors of these outcomes. Methods The European Society of Cardiology EURObservational Research Programme European Infective Endocarditis is a prospective, multicentre registry including patients with definite or possible IE throughout 2016–18. Cox multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to assess variables associated with EE or 30-day mortality. Results There were 2171 patients with LSIE (women 31.5%). Among these affected patients, 459 (21.1%) had a new EE or died in 30 days. The cut-off value of vegetation size for predicting EEs or 30-day mortality was &gt;10 mm [hazard ratio (HR) 1.38, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.13–1.69, P = .0015]. Other adjusted predictors of risk of EE or death were as follows: EE on admission (HR 1.89, 95% CI 1.54–2.33, P &lt; .0001), history of heart failure (HR 1.53, 95% CI 1.21–1.93, P = .0004), creatinine &gt;2 mg/dL (HR 1.59, 95% CI 1.25–2.03, P = .0002), Staphylococcus aureus (HR 1.36, 95% CI 1.08–1.70, P = .008), congestive heart failure (HR 1.40, 95% CI 1.12–1.75, P = .003), presence of haemorrhagic stroke (HR 4.57, 95% CI 3.08–6.79, P &lt; .0001), alcohol abuse (HR 1.45, 95% CI 1.04–2.03, P = .03), presence of cardiogenic shock (HR 2.07, 95% CI 1.29–3.34, P = .003), and not performing left surgery (HR 1.30 95% CI 1.05–1.61, P = .016) (C-statistic = .68). Conclusions Prognosis after LSIE is determined by multiple factors, including vegetation size