scholarly journals The Hospital Antimicrobial Use Process: From Beginning to End

2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
William R Truong ◽  
Jason Yamaki

Abstract Hospital antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) programs are responsible for ensuring that all antimicrobials are utilized in the most appropriate and safe manner to improve patient outcomes, prevent adverse drug reactions, and prevent the development of antimicrobial resistance. This Perspectives article outlines the hospital antimicrobial use process (AUP), the foundational system that ensures that all antimicrobials are utilized in the most appropriate and safe manner. The AUP consists of the following steps: antimicrobial ordering, order verification, preparation and delivery, administration, monitoring, and discharge prescribing. AMS programs should determine how each step contributes to how an antimicrobial is used appropriately or inappropriately at their institution. Through this understanding, AMS programs can integrate stewardship activities at each step to ensure that every opportunity is taken to optimize antimicrobial use during a patient’s treatment course. Hence, approaching AMS through the framework of a hospital’s AUP is essential to improving appropriate antimicrobial use.

2020 ◽  
Vol 105 (9) ◽  
pp. e23.1-e23
Author(s):  
Orlagh McGarrity ◽  
Aliya Pabani

Introduction, Aims and ObjectivesIn 2011 the Start Smart then Focus campaign was launched by Public Health England (PHE) to combat antimicrobial resistance.1 The ‘focus’ element refers to the antimicrobial review at 48–72 hours, when a decision and documentation regarding infection management should be made. [OM1] At this tertiary/quaternary paediatric hospital we treat, immunocompromised, high risk patients. In a recent audit it was identified that 80% of antimicrobial use is IV, this may be due to several factors including good central access, centrally prepared IV therapy and oral agents being challenging to administer to children. The aim of the audit was to assess if patient have a blood culture prior to starting therapy, have a senior review at 48–72 hours, and thirdly if our high proportion of intravenous antimicrobial use is justified.MethodElectronic prescribing data from JAC was collected retrospectively over an 8 day period. IV antimicrobials for which there is a suitable oral alternative, this was defined as >80% bioavailability, were included. Patients were excluded in the ICU, cancer and transplant setting, those with absorption issues and with a high risk infection, such as endocarditis or bacteraemia. Patient were assessed against a set criteria to determine if they were eligible to switch from IV to PO therapy; afebrile, stable blood pressure, heart rate <90/min, respiratory rate < 20/min for 24 hours. Reducing CRP, reducing white cell count, blood cultures negative or sensitive to an antibiotic that can be given orally.Results100% of patients (11) had a blood cultures taken within 72 hours of starting therapy55% of patients had a positive blood culture82% of patients had a senior review at 48–72 hours46% of patients were eligible to switch from IV to PO therapy at 72 hours33% of eligible patients were switched from IV to PO therapy at 72 hoursConclusion and RecommendationsThis audit had a low sample size due to the complexity of the inclusion and exclusion criteria, and the difficulty in reviewing patient parameters on many different hospital interfaces. It is known that each patient is reviewed at least 24 hourly on most wards and therefore there is a need for improved documentation of prescribing decisions. Implementation of an IV to oral switch guideline is recommended to support prescribing decisions and educate and reassure clinicians on the bioavailability and benefits of PO antimicrobial therapy where appropriate. Having recently changed electronic patient management systems strategies to explore include hard stops on IV antimicrobial therapies, however this will require much consideration. Education of pharmacist and nurses is required to raise awareness about antimicrobial resistance and the benefits of IV to PO switches, despite the ease of this therapy at out Trust. This will promote a culture in which all healthcare professionals are active antimicrobial guardians, leading to better patient outcomes, less service pressures, and long term financial benefit.ReferenceGOV.UK. 2019. Antimicrobial stewardship: Start smart - then focus. [ONLINE]Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/antimicrobial-stewardship-start-smart-then-focus [Accessed 3 July 2019]


Antibiotics ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (12) ◽  
pp. 918
Author(s):  
Katie Tiseo ◽  
Laura Huber ◽  
Marius Gilbert ◽  
Timothy P. Robinson ◽  
Thomas P. Van Boeckel

Demand for animal protein is rising globally and has been facilitated by the expansion of intensive farming. However, intensive animal production relies on the regular use of antimicrobials to maintain health and productivity on farms. The routine use of antimicrobials fuels the development of antimicrobial resistance, a growing threat for the health of humans and animals. Monitoring global trends in antimicrobial use is essential to track progress associated with antimicrobial stewardship efforts across regions. We collected antimicrobial sales data for chicken, cattle, and pig systems in 41 countries in 2017 and projected global antimicrobial consumption from 2017 to 2030. We used multivariate regression models and estimated global antimicrobial sales in 2017 at 93,309 tonnes (95% CI: 64,443, 149,886). Globally, sales are expected to rise by 11.5% in 2030 to 104,079 tonnes (95% CI: 69,062, 172,711). All continents are expected to increase their antimicrobial use. Our results show lower global antimicrobial sales in 2030 compared to previous estimates, owing to recent reports of decrease in antimicrobial use, in particular in China, the world’s largest consumer. Countries exporting a large proportion of their production are more likely to report their antimicrobial sales data than countries with small export markets.


2016 ◽  
Vol 29 (6) ◽  
pp. 556-563 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bryan M. Bishop

Antimicrobial resistance is a national public health concern. Misuse of antimicrobials for conditions such as upper respiratory infection, urinary tract infections, and cellulitis has led to increased resistance to antimicrobials commonly utilized to treat those infections, such as sulfamethoxazole/trimethoprim and flouroquinolones. The emergency department (ED) is a site where these infections are commonly encountered both in ambulatory patients and in patients requiring admission to a hospital. The ED is uniquely positioned to affect the antimicrobial use and resistance patterns in both ambulatory settings and inpatient settings. However, implementing antimicrobial stewardship programs in the ED is fraught with challenges including diagnostic uncertainty, distractions secondary to patient or clinician turnover, and concerns with patient satisfaction to name just a few. However, this review article highlights successful interventions that have stemmed inappropriate antimicrobial use in the ED setting and warrant further study. This article also proposes other, yet to be validated proposals. Finally, this article serves as a call to action for pharmacists working in antimicrobial stewardship programs and in emergency medicine settings. There needs to be further research on the implementation of these and other interventions to reduce inappropriate antimicrobial use to prevent patient harm and curb the development of antimicrobial resistance.


2016 ◽  
Vol 37 (5) ◽  
pp. 603-605 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nuttagarn Chuenchom ◽  
Visanu Thamlikitkul ◽  
Romanee Chaiwarith ◽  
Rawisut Deoisares ◽  
Pinyo Rattanaumpawan

A questionnaire-based study was conducted among final-year Thai medical students. The problem of antimicrobial resistance is well recognized, but their knowledge of antimicrobial resistance, appropriate antimicrobial use, and infection control was substantially limited. Only half of these students recognized existence of an antimicrobial stewardship program or infection control unit in their hospitals.Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2016;37:603–605


F1000Research ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 677 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andy R. Eugene ◽  
Beata Eugene

Background: Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) are a major cause of hospital admissions, prolonged hospital stays, morbidity, and drug-related mortality. In this study, we sought to identify the most frequently reported medications and associated side effects in adolescent-aged patients in an effort to prioritize clinical pharmacology consultation efforts for hospitals seeking to improve patient safety.   Methods: Quarterly reported data were obtained from the United States Food and Drug Administration Adverse Events Reporting System (FAERS) from the third quarter of 2014 and ending in the third quarter of 2017. We then used the GeneCards database to map the pharmacogenomic biomarkers associated with the most reported FAERS drugs. Data homogenization and statistics analysis were all conducted in R for statistical programming. Results: We identified risperidone (10.64%) as the compound with the most reported ADRs from all reported cases. Males represented 90.1% of reported risperidone cases with gynecomastia being the most reported ADR. Ibuprofen OR=188 (95% CI, 105.00 – 335.00) and quetiapine fumarate OR=116 (95% CI, 48.40 – 278.00) were associated with the highest odds of completed suicide in teenagers. Ondansetron hydrochloride OR=7.12 (95% CI, 1.59 – 31.9) resulted in the highest odds of pneumothorax. Lastly, olanzapine (8.96%) represented the compound with the most reported drug-drug interactions cases, while valproic acid OR=221 (95% CI, 93.900 – 522.00) was associated with the highest odds of drug-drug interactions. Conclusion: Despite any data limitations, physicians prescribing risperidone in males should be aware of the high rates of adverse drug events and an alternative psychotropic should be considered in male patients. Further, patients with a history of pneumothorax or genetically predisposed to pneumothorax should be considered for an alternative antiemetic to ondansetron hydrochloride, due to increased odds associated with the drug and adverse event.


Author(s):  
Sanitha Kuriachan ◽  
Prakash Krishnan ◽  
Bharti Chogtu ◽  
Manu Mathew George

Background: Adverse drug reactions are common with multidrug therapy in tuberculosis, if detected early can improve patient compliance and prevent emergence of resistance.Methods: A prospective observational study as a part of Pharmacovigilance Program under Central Drugs Standard Control Organisation was conducted in Kasturba hospital, Manipal to collect adverse drug reactions (ADR). Data of patients reported with antitubercular treatment (ATT) related ADRs from September 2012 to August 2013 was evaluated for patient demography, type of tuberculosis, ATT regimen, organ/ system affected and time of onset of ADR. ADRs were then subjected to causality assessment as per WHO scale.Results: A total of 65 ADRs were reported in 60 patients during the study period, of which 46.7% were in males and 53.3% in females. 85% of ADRs were reported in patients with pulmonary tuberculosis. 77% of ADRs were observed with daily regimen. Common ADRs were hepatitis (40%), gastritis (15%), skin reactions (15%), peripheral neuropathy (14%), gout (6%) and nephritis (3%). Median duration for the onset of ADR was 31 days each for hepatitis, gout, nephritis and 20, 11, 9 days for gastritis, peripheral neuropathy and skin reactions respectively. As per causality assessment, 80% of ADRs were assigned “possible”, 11% “probable” and 9% “certain”. As per severity scale 27.7% of ADR were severe, 36.9% were moderate.Conclusions: Early detection and management of ADRs is vital for the success of ATT and patient adherence.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document