The use of BLAST at the point of care across 3 hospital ASPs resulted in greater use of preferred β-lactam therapy without increasing the risk of adverse drug reactions. Longer-term studies are needed to better assess the safety and clinical impact of this ASP intervention.
BackgroundThe success of antimicrobial stewardship is dependent on how often it is completed and which antimicrobials are targeted. We evaluated the impact of an antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP) in three non-ICU settings where all systemic antibiotics, regardless of spectrum, were targeted on the first weekday after initiation.MethodsProspective audit and feedback (PAAF) was initiated on the surgical, respiratory, and medical wards of a community hospital on July 1, 2010, October 1, 2010, and April 1, 2012, respectively. We evaluated rates of total antibiotic use, measured in days on therapy (DOTs), among all patients admitted to the wards before and after PAAF initiation using an interrupted time series analysis. Changes in antibiotic costs, rates of C. difficile infection (CDI), mortality, readmission, and length of stay were evaluated using univariate analyses.ResultsTime series modelling demonstrated that total antibiotic use decreased (± standard error) by 100 ± 51 DOTs/1,000 patient-days on the surgical wards (p = 0.049), 100 ± 46 DOTs/1,000 patient-days on the respiratory ward (p = 0.029), and 91 ± 33 DOTs/1,000 patient-days on the medical wards (p = 0.006) immediately following PAAF initiation. Reductions in antibiotic use were sustained up to 50 months after intervention initiation, and were accompanied by decreases in antibiotic costs. There were no significant changes to patient outcomes on the surgical and respiratory wards following intervention initiation. On the medical wards, however, readmission increased from 4.6 to 5.6 per 1,000 patient-days (p = 0.043), while mortality decreased from 7.4 to 5.0 per 1,000 patient-days (p = 0.001). CDI rates showed a non-significant declining trend after PAAF initiation.ConclusionsASPs can lead to cost-effective, sustained reductions in total antibiotic use when interventions are conducted early in the course of therapy and target all antibiotics. Shifting to such a model may help strengthen the effectiveness of ASPs in non-ICU settings.
BackgroundAntimicrobial stewardship, a key component of an overall strategy to address antimicrobial resistance, has been recognized as a global priority. The ability to track and benchmark antimicrobial use (AMU) is critical to advancing stewardship from an organizational and provincial perspective. As there are few comprehensive systems in Canada that allow for benchmarking, Public Health Ontario conducted a pilot in 2016/2017 to assess the feasibility of using a point prevalence methodology as the basis of a province-wide AMU surveillance program.MethodsThree acute care hospitals of differing sizes in Ontario, Canada, participated. Adults admitted to inpatient acute care beds on the survey date were eligible for inclusion; a sample size of 170 per hospital was targeted, and data were collected for the 24-hour period before and including the survey date. Debrief sessions at each site were used to gather feedback about the process. Prevalence of AMU and the Antimicrobial Spectrum Index (ASI) was reported for each hospital and by indication per patient case.ResultsParticipants identified required improvements for scalability including streamlining ethics, data sharing processes, and enhancing the ability to compare with peer organizations at a provincial level. Of 457 patients, 172 (38%) were receiving at least 1 antimicrobial agent. Beta-lactam/beta-lactamase inhibitors were the most common (18%). The overall mean ASI per patient was 6.59; most cases were for treatment of infection (84%).ConclusionsThis pilot identified factors and features required for a scalable provincial AMU surveillance program; future efforts should harmonize administrative processes and enable interfacility benchmarking.
Background Patients with good renal function receiving intermittent-infusion vancomycin (IIV) may require total daily doses ≥4 g to achieve trough concentrations of 15–20 mg/L, increasing the risk of vancomycin-associated nephrotoxicity. Continuous-infusion vancomycin (CIV) may be associated with a lower risk of vancomycin-associated nephrotoxicity compared with IIV, but studies comparing safety of both dosing strategies are lacking. Objectives To compare the risk of nephrotoxicity with CIV versus IIV when target concentration ranges were the same with both dosing modalities. Methods A retrospective multicentre matched cohort study of admitted patients between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2016 was completed. Adult patients who received ≥48 h of vancomycin with at least one steady-state vancomycin concentration were eligible. The primary outcome was to compare the rates of nephrotoxic risk and renal injury, defined by the RIFLE criteria, between CIV and IIV. Results Of 2136 patients who received vancomycin during the study period, 146 CIV patients were eligible and matched to 146 IIV patients. After adjustment of potential confounders, CIV was found to have a lower odds of developing nephrotoxic risk (OR 0.42, 95% CI 0.21–0.98, P = 0.025) and renal injury (OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.05–0.59, P = 0.004). Conclusions CIV is associated with a lower odds of nephrotoxicity compared with IIV when targeting the same concentration range and should be an alternative dosing strategy for patients who will receive prolonged therapy or require >4 g/day to achieve therapeutic levels.
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.