Improving care for the ICU patient with suspected infection: a multidisciplinary perspective

Quality indicators in intensive care medicine for Germany - fourth edition 2022

The measurement of quality indicators supports quality improvement initiatives. The German Interdisciplinary Society of Intensive Care Medicine (DIVI) has published quality indicators for intensive care medicine for the fourth time now. After a scheduled evaluation after three years, changes in several indicators were made. Other indicators were not changed or only minimally. The focus remained strongly on relevant treatment processes like management of analgesia and sedation, mechanical ventilation and weaning, and infections in the ICU. Another focus was communication inside the ICU. The number of 10 indicators remained the same. The development method was more structured and transparency was increased by adding new features like evidence levels or author contribution and potential conflicts of interest. These quality indicators should be used in the peer review in intensive care, a method endorsed by the DIVI. Other forms of measurement and evaluation are also reasonable, for example in quality management. This fourth edition of the quality indicators will be updated in the future to reflect the recently published recommendations on the structure of intensive care units by the DIVI.

Doctors' Perceptions, Attitudes and Practices towards the Management of Multidrug-Resistant Organism Infections after the Implementation of an Antimicrobial Stewardship Programme during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Background: Greece is among the European countries with the highest consumption of antibiotics, both in community and hospital settings, including last-line antibiotics, such as carbapenems. We sought to explore doctors’ perceptions, attitudes and practices towards the management of patients with multidrug-resistant organism (MDRO) infections after the implementation of an antimicrobial stewardship programme (ASP) in a tertiary academic hospital during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: A self-administered, internet-based questionnaire survey was completed by doctors of the University Hospital of Heraklion in Crete, Greece. Results: In total, 202 (59.1%) hospital doctors fully completed the questionnaire. Most of them agreed that the prospective audit and feedback ASP strategy is more effective and educational than the preauthorization ASP strategy. ASP implementation prompted most respondents to monitor the continuously evolving microbiological data of their patients more closely and affected them towards a multidisciplinary and personalised care of patients with infections caused by MDROs and towards a more rigorous implementation of infection prevention and control measures. The vast majority of participants (98.5%) stated that ASP must be continued and further developed during the COVID-19 pandemic. Conclusion: The ASP implementation in our hospital had a beneficial impact on doctors’ perceptions, attitudes and practices with regard to the management of infections due to MDROs.