The nurses’ role in antimicrobial stewardship: A scoping review

2021 ◽  
Vol 113 ◽  
pp. 103772
Author(s):  
Pheona van Huizen ◽  
Lisa Kuhn ◽  
Philip L. Russo ◽  
Clifford J. Connell
2021 ◽  
Vol 52 ◽  
pp. 103036
Author(s):  
Stéphane L. Bouchoucha ◽  
Mataya Kilpatrick ◽  
Nicole M. Phillips ◽  
Anastasia F. Hutchinson

Antibiotics ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 263 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sajal K. Saha ◽  
Chris Barton ◽  
Shukla Promite ◽  
Danielle Mazza

The scope of antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) surveys on community pharmacists (CPs) is uncertain. This study examines the breadth and quality of AMS survey tools measuring the stewardship knowledge, perceptions and practices (KPP) of CPs and analyse survey outcomes. Following PRISMA-ScR checklist and Arksey and O’Malley’s methodological framework seven medical databases were searched. Two reviewers independently screened the literatures, assessed quality of surveys and KPP outcomes were analysed and described. Ten surveys were identified that assessed CPs’ AMS perceptions (n = 7) and practices (n = 8) but none that assessed AMS knowledge. Three survey tools had been formally validated. Most CPs perceived that AMS improved patient care (median 86.0%, IQR, 83.3–93.5%, n = 6), and reduced inappropriate antibiotic use (84.0%, IQR, 83–85%, n = 2). CPs collaborated with prescribers for infection control (54.7%, IQR 34.8–63.2%, n = 4) and for uncertain antibiotic treatment (77.0%, IQR 55.2–77.8%, n = 5). CPs educated patients (53.0%, IQR, 43.2–67.4%, n = 5) and screened guideline-compliance of antimicrobial prescriptions (47.5%, IQR, 25.2–58.3%, n = 3). Guidelines, training, interactions with prescribers, and reimbursement models were major barriers to CP-led AMS implementation. A limited number of validated survey tools are available to assess AMS perceptions and practices of CPs. AMS survey tools require further development to assess stewardship knowledge, stewardship targets, and implementation by CPs.


2011 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 6-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Edwards ◽  
LN Drumright ◽  
M. Kiernan ◽  
A. Holmes

2019 ◽  
Vol 24 ◽  
pp. S10
Author(s):  
Stephane Bouchoucha ◽  
Nikki Phillips ◽  
Mataya Kilpatrick ◽  
Ana Hutchinson

2020 ◽  
Vol 180 ◽  
pp. 105025 ◽  
Author(s):  
L Gozdzielewska ◽  
C King ◽  
P Flowers ◽  
D Mellor ◽  
P Dunlop ◽  
...  

Antibiotics ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (8) ◽  
pp. 498 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lesley Hawes ◽  
Kirsty Buising ◽  
Danielle Mazza

There is no published health-system-wide framework to guide antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) in general practice. The aim of this scoping review was to identify the component parts necessary to inform a framework to guide AMS in general practice. Six databases and nine websites were searched. The sixteen papers included were those that reported on AMS in general practice in a country where antibiotics were available by prescription from a registered provider. Six multidimensional components were identified: 1. Governance, including a national action plan with accountability, prescriber accreditation, and practice level policies. 2. Education of general practitioners (GPs) and the public about AMS and antimicrobial resistance (AMR). 3. Consultation support, including decision support with patient information resources and prescribing guidelines. 4. Pharmacist and nurse involvement. 5. Monitoring of antibiotic prescribing and AMR with feedback to GPs. 6. Research into gaps in AMS and AMR evidence with translation into practice. This framework for AMS in general practice identifies health-system-wide components to support GPs to improve the quality of antibiotic prescribing. It may assist in the development and evaluation of AMS interventions in general practice. It also provides a guide to components for inclusion in reports on AMS interventions.


2020 ◽  
Vol 44 ◽  
pp. 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer Hegewisch-Taylor ◽  
Anahí Dreser-Mansilla ◽  
Julián Romero-Mónico ◽  
Gabriel Levy-Hara

Objectives. To examine published antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) initiatives in hospitals in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) in order to characterize AMS terminology usage, geotemporality, and elements of structure (human resources), process (interventions), and outcomes, and to set priority areas for improving AMS reporting. Methods. This was a scoping review that searched PubMed, LILACS, EMBASE, and 12 other databases, along with a manual search for academic and grey literature to identify documents on AMS initiatives in hospitals in 33 countries of LAC, up to August 2019. Keywords included ‘antibiotic’ or ‘antimicrobial’ AND ‘stewardship, policy, strategies, management, control, rational use, appropriate use, surveillance, or interventions’ and 33 country names. Results. Selected articles totalled 147 studies published in 1985 – 2019; of those, 22% used ‘antimicrobial stewardship’ in the title. Eighteen countries published AMS hospital initiatives, one-half of which were implemented in capital cities. Brazil, Argentina, Colombia, Cuba, Mexico, and Chile, in descending frequency, made up > 59% of published initiatives. Educational interventions were the most frequently reported, followed by persuasive and restrictive strategies. Antimicrobial consumption was the most common outcome measure reported. About one-third of the studies (35%) referred to baseline measures-only in preparation for AMS interventions. Fifty-nine studies from 6 countries reported AMS comprehensively, using structure, process, and outcome (SPO) elements. Conclusions. Published hospital AMS initiatives have increased over time and have expanded across LAC. However, more programs need to be developed. Complete reporting of SPO elements is imperative to evaluating and replicating AMS actions.


2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (5) ◽  
pp. 1028-1035
Author(s):  
Bashar M. Augie ◽  
Patricia A. McInerney ◽  
Robyn L. van Zyl ◽  
Jacqui Miot

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarentha Chetty ◽  
Millidhashni Reddy ◽  
Yogandree Ramsamy ◽  
Anushka Naidoo ◽  
Sabiha Essack

Abstract Objectives To map published data of antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) interventions that are currently being carried out in hospitals and clinics in the public and private health sectors of South Africa in line with the antimicrobial resistance (AMR) strategy of South Africa. Methods A systematic scoping review was conducted to identify AMS initiatives in the public and private health sectors of South Africa for the period 1 January 2000 to 31 March 2019. An electronic search of databases was made including PubMed, Scopus, a key medical journal (South African Medical Journal), University of KwaZulu-Natal (UKZN) WorldCat iCatalogue and AMR networks: Federation of Infectious Diseases Societies in South Africa (FIDSSA). Reference lists of published articles were also reviewed for inclusion. Keywords included ‘antimicrobial antibiotic stewardship South Africa’. Findings Of a total of 411 articles, using a stepwise screening process, 18 articles were selected for inclusion in the review. The interventions/initiatives were divided into four broad categories: (i) AMS intervention: prescription audits and usage; (ii) AMS intervention: education and its impact; (iii) other AMS interventions; and (iv) the role of different healthcare professionals in AMS. Conclusions The data identifies a need for and the value of AMS in both the public and private health sectors of South Africa. Initiatives are carried out across both sectors but more attention needs to be focused on AMS implementation in line with the National AMR Strategy of South Africa. Collaboration between the different sectors will aid in overcoming the AMR challenge.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document