Appropriateness of antimicrobial therapy: a multicentre prevalence survey in the Netherlands, 2008–2009

Abstract

A survey was carried out to determine the prevalence and appropriateness of antimicrobial therapy (AMT) in the Netherlands and to identify determinants for inappropriate AMT. Prevalence surveys of patients hospitalised in the Netherlands were performed three times in 2008 and 2009. Patients' demographic, infectionrelated and AMT-related data were collected from hospital wards. A total of 19 hospitals participated, consisting of a mix of university, teaching and general hospitals, which were distributed evenly across the country. The appropriateness of AMT was assessed using a standardised algorithm based on local AMT prescription guidelines. A total of 7,853 patients were included, of which 2,327 (29.6%) patients were on AMT (range: 20.8-39.5%). In 372 patients (16% of patients on AMT), treatment was considered inappropriate. In 265 (11.4%) patients on AMT, appropriateness of treatment was not judged because of insufficient information. The percentage of patients without a judgment varied considerably between the participating hospitals (range: 1.3-36.2%). Appropriate AMT use was significantly associated with a patient being in an intensive care unit, having a central venous catheter and being given beta-lactamase-sensitive penicillins. The use of fluoroquinolones was significantly associated with more frequent inappropriate use. There was considerable and significant variation between the participating hospitals in the amount of antimicrobials prescribed and the appropriateness of their use. To improve the completeness and reliability of such surveys, there is a need for intensive training of observers and medical staff in recording information.

Assessment of empirical antibiotic therapy optimisation in six hospitals: an observational cohort study

“…3 Another analysis of 70 US teaching hospitals showed 64% of inpatients received antimicrobial therapy, 15 and a growing majority of that use was broad-spectrum antimicrobials. 16 Similar studies of French 17 and Dutch 18 hospitals showed that 41% and 30% of patients were on antimicrobials, respectively. Strategies to optimise prescribing, also termed “antimicrobial timeout” or “de-escalation”, have been studied in distinct populations defined by diagnosis, 19,20 use of a specific antimicrobial, 21,22 or intensive care unit status.…”

Causes, consequences, and perspectives in the variations of intestinal density of colonization of multidrug-resistant enterobacteria

“…Indeed, these programs can be beneficial to the intestinal microbiota at three levels: (i) avoid prescriptions when antibiotics are not justified (Willemsen et al, 2010), (ii) scale down from the use of empirical wide-spectrum antibiotics to the narrowest spectrum possible, guided by antibiotic-susceptibility tests (Cosgrove et al, 2007), and (iii) choose the antibiotic with the lowest impact on the intestinal microbiota whenever possible (Lesprit and Brun-Buisson, 2008). In a Cochrane-based review, ASPs have been showed to decrease the overall antibiotic resistance, as well as C. difficile infection, suggesting their role in intestinal microbiota preservation (Davey et al, 2005).…”

Antimicrobial stewardship: Time for change

“…No other issue can be more accurately portrayed by the ‘One Health’ initiative; it is an issue that has been caused by healthcare providers of all species and needs to be tackled by healthcare providers of all species. The British Veterinary Association (BVA) have recently claimed that overuse in human healthcare is the ‘biggest problem’ and while evidence of poor prescribing practices in human healthcare is common the evidence for blame is, at best, incomplete. While there is no evidence‐based strategy that will reduce existing resistance, the incontrovertible evidence is that antimicrobial use leads to antimicrobial resistance and that effective antimicrobial stewardship results in reduced antimicrobial use .…”