Barriers and Facilitators to the Implementation of the Early-Onset Sepsis Calculator:A Multicenter Survey Study

Prior studies demonstrated the neonatal early-onset sepsis (EOS) calculator’s potential in drastically reducing antibiotic prescriptions, and its international adoption is increasing rapidly. To optimize the EOS calculator’s impact, successful implementation is crucial. This study aimed to identify key barriers and facilitators to inform an implementation strategy. A multicenter cross-sectional survey was carried out among physicians, residents, nurses and clinical obstetricians of thirteen Dutch hospitals. Survey development was prepared through a literature search and stakeholder interviews. Data collection and analysis were based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). A total of 465 stakeholders completed the survey. The main barriers concerned the expectance of the department’s capacity problems and the issues with maternal information transfer between departments. Facilitators concerned multiple relative advantages of the EOS calculator, including stakeholder education, EOS calculator integration in the electronic health record and existing positive expectations about the safety and effectivity of the calculator. Based on these findings, tailored implementation interventions can be developed, such as identifying early adopters and champions, conducting educational meetings tailored to the target group, creating ready-to-use educational materials, integrating the EOS calculator into electronic health records, creating a culture of collective responsibility among departments and collecting data to evaluate implementation success and innovation results.</p

The RISAP-study: a complex intervention in risk communication and shared decision-making in general practice

General practitioners (GPs) and patients find it difficult to talk about risk of future disease, especially when patients have asymptomatic conditions, and treatment options are unlikely to cause immediate perceptible improvements in well-being. Further studies in risk communication training are needed. Aim:1) to systematically develop, describe and evaluate a complex intervention comprising a training programme for GPs in risk communication and shared decision-making, 2) to evaluate the effect of the training programme on real-life consultations between GPs and patients with high cholesterol levels, and 3) to evaluate patients' reactions during and after the consultations. Methods/Design The effect of the complex intervention, based around a training programme, will be evaluated in a cluster-randomised controlled trial with an intervention group and an active control group with 40 GPs and 280 patients in each group. The GPs will receive a questionnaire at baseline and after 6 months about attitudes towards risk communication and cholesterol-reducing medication. After each consultation with a participating high cholesterol-patient, the GPs will complete a questionnaire about decision satisfaction (Provider Decision Process Assessment Instrument). The patients will receive a questionnaire at baseline and after 3 and 6 months. It includes questions about adherence to chosen treatment (Morisky Compliance Scale), self-rated health (SF-12), enablement (Patient Enablement Instrument), and risk communication and decision-making effectiveness (COMRADE Scale). Prescriptions, contacts to the health services, and cholesterol level will be drawn from the registers. In each group, 12 consultations will be observed and tape-recorded. The patients from these 24 consultations will be interviewed immediately after the consultation and re-interviewed after 6 months. Eight purposefully selected GPs from the intervention group will be interviewed in a focus group 6 months after participation in the training programme. The process and context of the RISAP-study will be investigated in detail using an action research approach, in order to analyse adaptation of the intervention model to the specific context. Discussion This study aims at providing GPs and patients with a firm basis for active deliberation about preventive treatment options, with a view to optimising adherence to chosen treatment. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Protocol Registration System NCT0118705

Evaluating safety and effectiveness of the early-onset sepsis calculator to reduce antibiotic exposure in Dutch at-risk newborns: a protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial

Introduction Newborns are at risk for early-onset sepsis (EOS). In the Netherlands, EOS affects less than 0.2% of newborns, but approximately 5% are treated with empirical antibiotics. These numbers form an example of overtreatment in countries using risk-factor based guidelines for administrating antibiotics. An alternative to these guidelines is the EOS calculator, a tool that calculates an individual EOS risk and provides management recommendation. However, validation outside the North-American setting is limited, especially for safety outcomes. We aim to investigate whether EOS calculator use can safely reduce antibiotic exposure in newborns with suspected EOS compared with the Dutch guideline. Methods and analysis This protocol describes a cluster randomised controlled trial assessing whether EOS calculator use is non-inferior regarding safety, and superior regarding limiting overtreatment, compared with the Dutch guideline. We will include newborns born at ≥34 weeks' gestation, with at least one risk factor consistent with EOS within 24 hours after birth. After 1:1 randomisation, the 10 participating Dutch hospitals will use either the Dutch guideline or the EOS calculator as standard of care for all newborns at risk for EOS. In total, 1830 newborns will be recruited. The coprimary non-inferiority outcome will be the presence of at least one of four predefined safety criteria. The coprimary superiority outcome will be the proportion of participants starting antibiotic therapy for suspected and, or proven EOS within 24 hours after birth. Secondary outcomes will be the total duration of antibiotic therapy, the percentage of antibiotic therapy started between 24 and 72 hours after birth, and parent-reported quality of life. Analyses will be performed both as intention to treat and per protocol. Ethics and dissemination This trial has been approved by the Medical Ethics Committee of the Amsterdam UMC (NL78203.018.21). Results will be presented in peer-reviewed journals and at international conferences. Trial registration number NCT05274776

Multicentre study found that adherence to national antibiotic recommendations for neonatal early-onset sepsis was low

Aim: Our aim was to evaluate adherence to the Dutch neonatal early-onset sepsis (EOS) guidelines, adapted from UK guidance. We also looked at the effect on antibiotic recommendations and duration. Method: This was a multicentre, prospective observational cross-sectional study carried out in seven hospitals in the Netherlands between 1 September 2018 and 1 November 2019. We enrolled 1024 neonates born at 32 weeks of gestation or later if they demonstrated at least one EOS risk factor or clinical signs of infection. Results: The Dutch guidelines recommended antibiotic treatment for 438/1024 (42.8%) of the neonates designated at risk, but only 186/438 (42.5%) received antibiotics. The guidelines advised withholding antibiotics for 586/1024 (57.2%) of neonates and in 570/586 (97.3%) cases the clinicians adhered to this recommendation. Blood cultures were obtained for 182/186 (97.8%) infants who started antibiotics and only four were positive, for group B streptococci. Antibiotic treatment was continued for more than 3 days in 56/178 (31.5%) neonates, despite a negative blood culture. Conclusion: Low adherence to the Dutch guidelines meant that the majority of neonates did not receive the antibiotic treatment that was recommended, while some antibiotic use was prolonged despite negative blood cultures. The guidelines need to be revised

Group B Streptococcus Early-Onset Disease: New Preventive and Diagnostic Tools to Decrease the Burden of Antibiotic Use

The difficulty in recognizing early-onset neonatal sepsis (EONS) in a timely manner due to non-specific symptoms and the limitations of diagnostic tests, combined with the risk of serious consequences if EONS is not treated in a timely manner, has resulted in a low threshold for starting empirical antibiotic treatment. New guideline strategies, such as the neonatal sepsis calculator, have been proven to reduce the antibiotic burden related to EONS, but lack sensitivity for detecting EONS. In this review, the potential of novel, targeted preventive and diagnostic methods for EONS is discussed from three different perspectives: maternal, umbilical cord and newborn perspectives. Promising strategies from the maternal perspective include Group B Streptococcus (GBS) prevention, exploring the virulence factors of GBS, maternal immunization and antepartum biomarkers. The diagnostic methods obtained from the umbilical cord are preliminary but promising. Finally, promising fields from the newborn perspective include biomarkers, new microbiological techniques and clinical prediction and monitoring strategies. Consensus on the definition of EONS and the standardization of research on novel diagnostic biomarkers are crucial for future implementation and to reduce current antibiotic overexposure in newborns