scholarly journals Changes in antimicrobial prescribing behavior after the introduction of the antimicrobial stewardship program: A pre- and post-intervention survey

2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruchir Chavada ◽  
Harry N. Walker ◽  
Deborah Tong ◽  
Amy Murray
Keyword(s):  
Antimicrobial Stewardship ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Post Intervention ◽  
Electronic Decision Support ◽  
Prescribing Behavior ◽  
Antimicrobial Prescribing ◽  
Stewardship Program ◽  
Wilcoxon Rank Sum Test ◽  
Therapeutic Guidelines ◽  
Evidence Based Guidelines

The introduction of an antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) program is associated with a change in antimicrobial prescribing behavior. A proposed mechanism for this change is by impacting the <em>prescribing</em> <em>etiquette</em> described in qualitative studies. This study sought to detect a change in prescribing attitudes 12 months after the introduction of AMS and gauge utility of various AMS interventions. Surveys were distributed to doctors in two regional Australian hospitals on a convenience basis 6 months before, and 12 months after, the introduction of AMS. Agreement with 20 statements describing attitudes (cultural, behavioral and knowledge) towards antimicrobial prescribing was assessed on a 4-point Likert scale. Mean response scores were compared using the Wilcoxon Rank sum test. 155 responses were collected before the introduction of AMS, and 144 afterwards. After the introduction of AMS, an increase was observed in knowledge about available resources such as electronic decision support systems (EDSS) and therapeutic guidelines, with raised awareness about the support available through AMS rounds and the process to be followed when prescribing restricted antimicrobials. Additionally, doctors were less likely to rely on pharmacy to ascertain when an antimicrobial was restricted, depend on infectious diseases consultant advice and use past experience to guide antimicrobial prescribing. Responses to this survey indicate that positive changes to the antimicrobial prescribing etiquette may be achieved with the introduction of an AMS program. Use of EDSS and other resources such as evidence-based guidelines are perceived to be important to drive rational antimicrobial prescribing within AMS programs.

scholarly journals Implementation of a Rapid Phenotypic Susceptibility Platform for Gram-Negative Bloodstream Infections With Paired Antimicrobial Stewardship Intervention: Is the Juice Worth the Squeeze?

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Evan D Robinson ◽  
Allison M Stilwell ◽  
April E Attai ◽  
Lindsay E Donohue ◽  
Megan D Shah ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Median Time ◽  
Antimicrobial Stewardship ◽  
A Priori ◽  
Bloodstream Infections ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Post Intervention ◽  
Gram Negative ◽  
Stewardship Program ◽  
Days Of Therapy ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background Implementation of the Accelerate PhenoTM Gram-negative platform (RDT) paired with antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP) intervention projects to improve time to institutional-preferred antimicrobial therapy (IPT) for Gram-negative bacilli (GNB) bloodstream infections (BSIs). However, few data describe the impact of discrepant RDT results from standard of care (SOC) methods on antimicrobial prescribing. Methods A single-center, pre-/post-intervention study of consecutive, nonduplicate blood cultures for adult inpatients with GNB BSI following combined RDT + ASP intervention was performed. The primary outcome was time to IPT. An a priori definition of IPT was utilized to limit bias and to allow for an assessment of the impact of discrepant RDT results with the SOC reference standard. Results Five hundred fourteen patients (PRE 264; POST 250) were included. Median time to antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) results decreased 29.4 hours (P &lt; .001) post-intervention, and median time to IPT was reduced by 21.2 hours (P &lt; .001). Utilization (days of therapy [DOTs]/1000 days present) of broad-spectrum agents decreased (PRE 655.2 vs POST 585.8; P = .043) and narrow-spectrum beta-lactams increased (69.1 vs 141.7; P &lt; .001). Discrepant results occurred in 69/250 (28%) post-intervention episodes, resulting in incorrect ASP recommendations in 10/69 (14%). No differences in clinical outcomes were observed. Conclusions While implementation of a phenotypic RDT + ASP can improve time to IPT, close coordination with Clinical Microbiology and continued ASP follow up are needed to optimize therapy. Although uncommon, the potential for erroneous ASP recommendations to de-escalate to inactive therapy following RDT results warrants further investigation.

scholarly journals Perceptions of Antimicrobial Stewardship among Infectious Disease Physicians at Two Affiliated Teaching Hospitals

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (S1) ◽  
pp. s346-s348
Author(s):  
Katharina Rynkiewich ◽  
David Schwartz ◽  
Sarah Won ◽  
Brad Stoner
Keyword(s):  
Infectious Disease ◽  
Qualitative Analysis ◽  
Antimicrobial Stewardship ◽  
Ethnographic Study ◽  
Teaching Hospitals ◽  
Prescribing Behavior ◽  
Doctoral Candidate ◽  
Stewardship Program ◽  
Primary Service ◽  
Attending Physicians

Background: Two affiliated teaching hospitals in Chicago, Illinois, participated in an ethnographic study of hospital-based inpatient antimicrobial stewardship programs and interventions between 2017 and 2018. Although antimicrobial stewardship is now a requirement in medical practice, it is not clear how infectious disease physicians perceive and understand antimicrobial stewardship. Over a period of 18 months, we directly observed infectious disease practice to better understand how antimicrobial stewardship is conducted among physicians within the same specialty. Methods: A doctoral candidate medical anthropologist conducted semistructured interviews with infectious disease attending physicians and fellow physicians (N = 18) at 2 affiliated teaching hospitals in Chicago, IL, between July 2017 and March 2018 as part of an ethnographic study involving direct observation of inpatient care. Interview questions focused on 3 key domains: (1) descriptions of antimicrobial use among hospital-based physicians, (2) solicited definitions of antimicrobial stewardship, and (3) experiences practicing as an infectious disease consultant. Physicians who were directly involved with the antimicrobial stewardship program were excluded from this analysis. Transcriptions of the data were analyzed using thematic coding aided by MAXQDA qualitative analysis software. Results: Infectious disease physicians have a robust understanding of antimicrobial stewardship (Table 1). Infectious disease physicians described other hospital-based physicians as regularly overusing and misusing antimicrobials, compared with their practice, which they described as “thoughtful.” Definitions in response to the question “What is antimicrobial stewardship?” centered on guiding the prescribing behavior of others. Infectious disease physicians valued stewardship and were concerned with lack of adherence to antimicrobial prescribing recommendations among other hospital-based physicians, behaviors which infectious disease physicians viewed as perpetuating antibiotic resistance. Finally, infectious disease physicians found serving as antimicrobial stewards during their everyday practice to be challenging based on their role as consultants to the primary service. Conclusions: Our qualitative analysis revealed that infectious disease physicians not regularly involved in antimicrobial stewardship are highly motivated stewards who perceive their hospital-based colleagues to be less effective at appropriately prescribing antimicrobials. As consultants, infectious disease physicians are not autonomous decision makers. However, as antimicrobial stewardship programs search for champions, infectious disease physicians could be better utilized as knowledgeable and motivated individuals who can make the case for stewardship.Funding: NoneDisclosures: None

scholarly journals 142. Implementing an Antimicrobial Stewardship Program in the Outpatient Setting

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S82-S82
Author(s):  
Travis B Nielsen ◽  
Maressa Santarossa ◽  
Beatrice D Probst ◽  
Laurie Labuszewski ◽  
Jenna Lopez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Antimicrobial Stewardship ◽  
Inappropriate Prescribing ◽  
The United States ◽  
Outpatient Setting ◽  
Urgent Care ◽  
Antibiotic Prescribing ◽  
Antimicrobial Stewardship Program ◽  
Post Intervention ◽  
Stewardship Program

Abstract Background Antimicrobial-resistant infections lead to increased morbidity, mortality, and healthcare costs. Among the most facile modifiable risk factors for developing resistance is inappropriate prescribing. The CDC estimates that 47 million (or ≥30% of) outpatient antibiotic prescriptions in the United States are unnecessary. This has provided impetus for expanding our antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP) into the outpatient setting. Initial goals included the following: continuous evaluation and reporting of antibiotic prescribing compliance; minimize underuse of antibiotics from delayed diagnoses and misdiagnoses; ensure proper drug, dose, and duration; improve the percentage of appropriate prescriptions. Methods To achieve these goals, we first sent a baseline survey to outpatient prescribers, assessing their understanding of stewardship and antimicrobial resistance. Questions were modeled from the Illinois Department of Public Health (IDPH) Precious Drugs & Scary Bugs Campaign. The survey was sent to prescribers at 19 primary care and three immediate/urgent care clinics. Compliance rates for prescribing habits were subsequently tracked via electronic health records and reported to prescribers in accordance with IRB approval. Results Prescribers were highly knowledgeable about what constitutes appropriate prescribing, with verified compliance rates highly concordant with self-reported rates. However, 74% of respondents reported intense pressure from patients to inappropriately prescribe antimicrobials. Compliance rates have been tracked since December 2018 and comparing pre- with post-intervention rates shows improvement in primary care since reporting rates to prescribers in August 2019. Conclusion Reporting compliance rates has been helpful in avoiding inappropriate antimicrobial therapy. However, the survey data reinforce the importance of behavioral interventions to bolster ASP efficacy in the outpatient setting. Going forward, posters modeled off of the IDPH template will be conspicuously exhibited in exam rooms, indicating institutional commitment to the enumerated ASP guidelines. Future studies will allow for comparison of pre- and post-intervention knowledge and prescriber compliance. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

scholarly journals 2044. An Assessment and Feedback Model Bringing Antimicrobial Stewardship Program Expertise to Long-Term Care Facilities

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. S687-S687
Author(s):  
Philip Chung ◽  
Kate Tyner ◽  
Scott Bergman ◽  
Teresa Micheels ◽  
Mark E Rupp ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Antimicrobial Stewardship ◽  
Long Term Care ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
Post Intervention ◽  
Term Care ◽  
Clostridioides Difficile ◽  
Stewardship Program ◽  
Days Of Therapy ◽  
Care Facilities

Abstract Background Long-term care facilities (LTCF) often struggle with implementation of antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASP) that meet all CDC core elements (CE). The CDC recommends partnership with infectious diseases (ID)/ASP experts to guide ASP implementation. The Nebraska Antimicrobial Stewardship Assessment and Promotion Program (ASAP) is an initiative funded by NE DHHS via a CDC grant to assist healthcare facilities with ASP implementation. Methods ASAP performed on-site baseline evaluation of ASP in 5 LTCF (42–293 beds) in the spring of 2017 using a 64-item questionnaire based on CDC CE. After interviewing ASP members, ASAP provided prioritized facility-specific recommendations for ASP implementation. LTCF were periodically contacted in the next 12 months to provide implementation support and evaluate progress. The number of CE met, recommendations implemented, antibiotic starts (AS) and days of therapy (DOT)/1000 resident-days (RD), and incidence of facility-onset Clostridioides difficile infections (FO-CDI) were compared 6 to 12 months before and after on-site visits. Paired t-test and Wilcoxon signed rank test were used for statistical analyses. Results Multidisciplinary ASP existed in all 5 facilities at baseline with medical directors (n = 2) or directors of nursing (n = 3) designated as team leads. Median CE implemented increased from 3 at baseline to 6 at the end of follow-up (P = 0.06). No LTCF had all 7 CE at baseline. By the end of one year, 2 facilities implemented all 7 CE with the remaining implementing 6 CE. LTCF not meeting all CE were only deficient in reporting ASP metrics to providers and staff. Among the 38 recommendations provided by ASAP, 82% were partially or fully implemented. Mean AS/1000 RD reduced by 19% from 10.1 at baseline to 8.2 post-intervention (P = 0.37) and DOT/1000 RD decreased by 21% from 91.7 to 72.5 (P = 0.20). The average incidence of FO-CDI decreased by 75% from 0.53 to 0.13 cases/10,000 RD (P = 0.25). Conclusion Assessment of LTCF ASP along with feedback for improvement by ID/ASP experts resulted in more programs meeting all 7 CE. Favorable reductions in antimicrobial use and CDI rates were also observed. Moving forward, the availability of these services should be expanded to all LTCFs struggling with ASP implementation. Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures.

The positive effects of an antimicrobial stewardship program targeting outpatient hemodialysis facilities

2018 ◽  
Vol 39 (12) ◽  
pp. 1400-1405 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erika M. C. D’Agata ◽  
Curt C. Lindberg ◽  
Claire M. Lindberg ◽  
Gemma Downham ◽  
Brandi Esposito ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Antimicrobial Stewardship ◽  
Interrupted Time Series ◽  
Multidrug Resistant ◽  
Prescribing Patterns ◽  
Antimicrobial Stewardship Program ◽  
Intervention Period ◽  
Positive Effects ◽  
Antimicrobial Prescribing ◽  
Stewardship Program ◽  
Dialysis Facilities

AbstractBackgroundAntimicrobial stewardship programs are effective in optimizing antimicrobial prescribing patterns and decreasing the negative outcomes of antimicrobial exposure, including the emergence of multidrug-resistant organisms. In dialysis facilities, 30%–35% of antimicrobials are either not indicated or the type of antimicrobial is not optimal. Although antimicrobial stewardship programs are now implemented nationwide in hospital settings, programs specific to the maintenance dialysis facilities have not been developed.ObjectiveTo quantify the effect of an antimicrobial stewardship program in reducing antimicrobial prescribing.Study design and settingAn interrupted time-series study in 6 outpatient hemodialysis facilities was conducted in which mean monthly antimicrobial doses per 100 patient months during the 12 months prior to the program were compared to those in the 12-month intervention period.ResultsImplementation of the antimicrobial stewardship program was associated with a 6% monthly reduction in antimicrobial doses per 100 patient months during the intervention period (P=.02). The initial mean of 22.6 antimicrobial doses per 100 patient months decreased to a mean of 10.5 antimicrobial doses per 100 patient months at the end of the intervention. There were no significant changes in antimicrobial use by type, including vancomycin. Antimicrobial adjustments were recommended for 30 of 145 antimicrobial courses (20.6%) for which there were sufficient clinical data. The most frequent reasons for adjustment included de-escalation from vancomycin to cefazolin for methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus infections and discontinuation of antimicrobials when criteria for presumed infection were not met.ConclusionsWithin 6 hemodialysis facilities, implementation of an antimicrobial stewardship was associated with a decline in antimicrobial prescribing with no negative effects.

scholarly journals When Antimicrobial Stewardship Isn′t Watching: The Educational Impact of Critical Care Prospective Audit and Feedback

2016 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dimitra Fleming ◽  
Karim F. Ali ◽  
John Matelski ◽  
Ryan D'Sa ◽  
Jeff Powis
Keyword(s):  
Critical Care ◽  
Antimicrobial Stewardship ◽  
Care Setting ◽  
Audit And Feedback ◽  
Antimicrobial Use ◽  
Prospective Audit ◽  
Educational Impact ◽  
Antimicrobial Prescribing ◽  
Stewardship Program ◽  
Prospective Audit And Feedback

Abstract Prospective audit and feedback (PAF) is an effective strategy to optimize antimicrobial use in the critical care setting, yet whether skills gained during PAF influence future antimicrobial prescribing is uncertain. This multisite study demonstrates that knowledge learned during PAF is translated and incorporated into the practice of critical care physicians even when not supported by an antimicrobial stewardship program.

Sustained Savings from a Longitudinal Cost Analysis of an Internet-Based Preapproval Antimicrobial Stewardship Program

2013 ◽  
Vol 34 (6) ◽  
pp. 573-580 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna C. Sick ◽  
Christoph U. Lehmann ◽  
Pranita D. Tamma ◽  
Carlton K. K. Lee ◽  
Allison L. Agwu
Keyword(s):  
Cost Analysis ◽  
Antimicrobial Stewardship ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Cost Savings ◽  
Antimicrobial Stewardship Program ◽  
Pediatric Hospital ◽  
Antimicrobial Prescribing ◽  
Approval Rate ◽  
Stewardship Program ◽  
Sustained Reduction

Objective.To evaluate an internet-based preapproval antimicrobial stewardship program for sustained reduction in antimicrobial prescribing and resulting cost savings.Design.Retrospective cohort study and cost analysis.Methods.Review of all doses and charges of antimicrobials dispensed to patients over 6 years (July 1, 2005–June 30, 2011) at a tertiary care pediatric hospital.Results.Restricted antimicrobials account for 26% of total doses but 81% of total antimicrobial charges. Winter months (November–February) and the oncology and infant and toddler units were associated with the highest antimicrobial charges. Five restricted drugs accounted for the majority (54%) of charges but only 6% of doses. With an average approval rate of 91.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 91.1%–91.9%), the preapproval antibiotic stewardship program saved $103,787 (95% CI, $98,583–$109,172) per year, or $14,156 (95% CI, $13,446–$14,890) per 1,000 patient-days.Conclusions.A preapproval antimicrobial stewardship program effectively reduces the number of doses and subsequent charges due to restricted antimicrobials years after implementation. Hospitals with reduced resources for implementing postprescription review may benefit from a preapproval antimicrobial stewardship program. Targeting specific units, drugs, and seasons may optimize preapproval programs for additional cost savings.

scholarly journals A Novel Metric to Monitor the Influence of Antimicrobial Stewardship Activities

2017 ◽  
Vol 38 (06) ◽  
pp. 721-723 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel J. Livorsi ◽  
Erin O’Leary ◽  
Tamra Pierce ◽  
Lindsey Reese ◽  
Katharina L. van Santen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Antimicrobial Stewardship ◽  
Audit And Feedback ◽  
Antimicrobial Use ◽  
Prospective Audit ◽  
Infectious Disease Physician ◽  
Antimicrobial Prescribing ◽  
National Healthcare Safety Network ◽  
Stewardship Program ◽  
Prospective Audit And Feedback ◽  
Antimicrobial Administration

The antimicrobial use (AU) option within the National Healthcare Safety Network summarizes antimicrobial prescribing data as a standardized antimicrobial administration ratio (SAAR). A hospital’s antimicrobial stewardship program found that greater involvement of an infectious disease physician in prospective audit and feedback procedures was associated with reductions in SAAR values across multiple antimicrobial categories. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2017;38:721–723

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document