Objective: To review the use of antibiotic stewardship interventions in the adult oncology and hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) populations. Data Sources: A literature search of PubMed was performed from inception to October 31, 2019. The general search terms used were oncology, cancer, hematologic malignancy, antimicrobial stewardship, antibiotic stewardship, febrile neutropenia, neutropenic fever, de-escalation, discontinuation, prophylaxis, practice guidelines, clinical pathway, rapid diagnostics, Filmarray, Verigene, MALDI-TOF, antibiotic allergy, and antimicrobial resistance. Study Selection and Data Extraction: Relevant English-language studies describing interventions supported by the Infectious Diseases Society of America guidelines on “Implementing an Antibiotic Stewardship Program” were included. Data Synthesis: Antibiotic stewardship publications in the oncology population have increased in recent years. Studies have described the impact of stewardship interventions, including preauthorization, prospective audit and feedback, implementation of clinical pathways, de-escalation of empirical antibiotics for febrile neutropenia (FN) prior to neutrophil recovery, allergy assessments, and use of rapid diagnostic testing. Many of these interventions have been shown to decrease antibiotic use without increased negative consequences, such as affecting length of stay or mortality. Relevance to Patient Care and Clinical Practice: This review synthesizes available evidence for implementing antibiotic stewardship interventions, particularly de-escalation of antibiotics for FN and implementation of clinical pathways for FN and sepsis, in oncology patients and HCT recipients. Summary tables highlight studies and specific research needs for clinicians. Conclusions: Immunocompromised populations, including oncology patients, have often been excluded from stewardship studies. Antibiotic stewardship is effective in reducing antibiotic consumption and improving outcomes in this patient population, although more quality data are needed.
Multiplex PCR combined with a pharmacist-driven reporting protocol was compared to the standard of care within a community hospital to evaluate initial changes after notification of a positive blood culture. The intervention group demonstrated decreased times to changes in antimicrobial therapy (P = 0.0081), increased changes to optimal antimicrobial therapy (P = 0.013), and decreased vancomycin use for coagulase-negative staphylococcus contaminants (P < 0.01) with multiplex PCR implementation and pharmacist intervention.
Objective: To determine the usefulness of adjusting antibiotic use (AU) by prevalence of bacterial isolates as an alternative method for risk adjustment beyond hospital characteristics. Design: Retrospective, observational, cross-sectional study. Setting: Hospitals in the southeastern United States. Methods: AU in days of therapy per 1,000 patient days and microbiologic data from 2015 and 2016 were collected from 26 hospitals. The prevalences of Pseudomonas aeruginosa, extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL)–producing bacteria, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), and vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) were calculated and compared to the average prevalence of all hospitals in the network. This proportion was used to calculate the adjusted AU (a-AU) for various categories of antimicrobials. For example, a-AU of antipseudomonal β-lactams (APBL) was the AU of APBL divided by (prevalence of P. aeruginosa at that hospital divided by the average prevalence of P. aeruginosa). Hospitals were categorized by bed size and ranked by AU and a-AU, and the rankings were compared. Results: Most hospitals in 2015 and 2016, respectively, moved ≥2 positions in the ranking using a-AU of APBL (15 of 24, 63%; 22 of 26, 85%), carbapenems (14 of 23, 61%; 22 of 25; 88%), anti-MRSA agents (13 of 23, 57%; 18 of 26, 69%), and anti-VRE agents (18 of 24, 75%; 15 of 26, 58%). Use of a-AU resulted in a shift in quartile of hospital ranking for 50% of APBL agents, 57% of carbapenems, 35% of anti-MRSA agents, and 75% of anti-VRE agents in 2015 and 50% of APBL agents, 28% of carbapenems, 50% of anti-MRSA agents, and 58% of anti-VRE agents in 2016. Conclusions: The a-AU considerably changes how hospitals compare among each other within a network. Adjusting AU by microbiological burden allows for a more balanced comparison among hospitals with variable baseline rates of resistant bacteria.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.