Towards a global definition of responsible antibiotic use: results of an international multidisciplinary consensus procedure

An in-depth analysis of antimicrobial prescription quality in 10 non-university hospitals, in southwest Germany, 2021

BackgroundNon-university hospitals are the major provider of inpatient care in Germany, serving 89% of acute care hospital beds. Although surveillance data on antimicrobial use in hospitals are widely available, data on prescription quality are rare.AimWe aimed to provide an in-depth analysis of antimicrobial prescribing patterns and quality in southwest German non-university hospitals.MethodsDuring 2021, we performed three point prevalence surveys (PPS) in 10 non-university hospitals, representing ca 10% of hospital beds in the federal state of Baden-Württemberg (11 million inhabitants). Demographic and clinical information were collected. We assessed the overall performance of 14 validated process quality indicators (QI) covering infection diagnostics, antimicrobial therapy and documentation.ResultsOf 8,560 patients analysed, 2,861 (33%) received at least one antimicrobial. Most (2,789, 80%) antimicrobial prescriptions were for therapeutic indications. Most frequently prescribed agents were beta-lactam/beta-lactamase inhibitors (1,120, 40%) in therapeutic and cefuroxime (269, 37%) in prophylactic indications. According to the World Health Organization's Access, Watch, Reserve classification, the Access-to-Watch ratio was 0.73. Overall adherence to QIs was low and varied substantially (27-93%), with documentation, possible streamlining and switching to oral therapy exhibiting the lowest fulfilment rates (< 50%).ConclusionThe results indicate a need to improve antimicrobial prescribing quality in non-university hospitals. The high prevalence of antimicrobial use in our setting underlines the demand for sustainable antimicrobial stewardship programmes in this sector. Our QI-based PPS approach can be used to identify key targets for future antimicrobial stewardship interventions. The results indicate a need for further legislation on antimicrobial stewardship.

Improving antibiotic use in hospitals: development of a digital antibiotic review tracking toolkit (DARTT) using the behaviour change wheel

OBJECTIVE

To develop a theory-informed behaviour change intervention to promote appropriate hospital antibiotic use, guided by the Medical Research Council's complex interventions framework.

METHODS

A phased approach was used, including triangulation of data from meta-ethnography and two qualitative studies. Central to intervention design was the generation of a robust theoretical basis using the Behaviour Change Wheel to identify relevant determinants of behaviour change and intervention components. Intervention content was guided by APEASE (Acceptability, Practicability, Effectiveness, Affordability, Side-effects, and Equity) criteria and coded using a Behaviour Change Technique Taxonomy. Stakeholders were involved throughout.

RESULTS

From numerous modifiable prescribing behaviours identified, active 'antibiotic time-out' was selected as the target behaviour to help clinicians safely initiate antibiotic reassessment. Prescribers' capability, opportunity, and motivation were potential drivers for changing this behaviour. The design process resulted in the selection of 25 behaviour change techniques subsequently translated into intervention content. Integral to this work was the development and refinement of a Digital Antibiotic Review Tracking Toolkit.

CONCLUSION

This novel work demonstrates how the Behaviour Change Wheel can be used with the Medical Research Council framework to develop a theory-based behaviour change intervention targeting barriers to timely hospital antibiotic reassessment. Future research will evaluate the Antibiotic Toolkit's feasibility and effectiveness.

Antimicrobial stewardship: a definition with a One Health perspective

Antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) is a commonly advocated approach to address antimicrobial resistance. However, AMS is often defined in different ways depending on where it is applied, such that a range of definitions is now in use. These definitions may be functional and well-structured for a given context but are often ill-adapted for collaborative work, creating difficulties for intersectoral communication on AMS and complicating the design, implementation, and evaluation of AMS interventions from a One Health perspective. Using boundary object theory, we identified three key elements common to AMS in different settings in the human and animal health sectors-a sense of collective and temporal responsibility, flexibility in scale and scope, and contextual contingency. Based on these findings, we propose a definition for antimicrobial stewardship applicable to the human and animal health sectors, intended to facilitate intersectoral communication and cooperation. Further directions of this work could include the application of the definition to develop indicators for evaluating stewardship interventions and the extension of the definition to incorporate elements pertinent to plant and ecosystem health.

Diagnostic uncertainty in infectious diseases: Advocacy for a nosological framework

Diagnostic uncertainty (DU) is frequent in infectious diseases (ID), being recorded in 10% to over 50% of patients. Herein, we show that in several fields of clinical practice, high rates of DU are constant over time. DUs are not taken into account in guidelines, as therapeutic propositions are based on an established diagnosis. Moreover, while other guidelines underline the need for rapid broad-spectrum antibiotic therapy for patients with sepsis, many clinical conditions mimic sepsis and lead to unnecessary antibiotic therapy. Considering DU, many studies have been carried out to look for relevant biomarkers of infections, which also attest to non-infectious diseases mimicking infections. Therefore, diagnosis is often primarily a hypothesis, and empirical antibiotic therapy should be reassessed when microbiological data are available. However, other than for urinary tract infections or unexpected primary bacteremia, the high frequency of sterile microbiological samples implies that DU remains central in follow-up, which does not facilitate clinical management or antibiotic optimization. The main way to resolve the therapeutic challenge of DU could be to precisely describe the latter through a consensual definition that would facilitate consideration of DU and its mandatory therapeutic implications. A consensual definition of DU would also clarify responsibility and accountability for physicians in the antimicrobial approval process and l provide an opportunity to instruct their students in this large field of medical practices and to productively conduct relevant research.

Establishing internationally accepted conceptual and operational definitions of social prescribing through expert consensus: a Delphi study

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to establish internationally accepted conceptual and operational definitions of social prescribing.

DESIGN

A three-round Delphi study was conducted.

SETTING

This study was conducted virtually using an online survey platform.

PARTICIPANTS

This study involved an international, multidisciplinary panel of experts. The expert panel (n=48) represented 26 countries across five continents, numerous expert groups and a variety of years of experience with social prescribing, with the average being 5 years (range=1-20 years).

RESULTS

After three rounds, internationally accepted conceptual and operational definitions of social prescribing were established. The definitions were transformed into the Common Understanding of Social Prescribing (CUSP) conceptual framework.

CONCLUSION

This foundational work offers a common thread-a shared sense of what social prescribing is, which may be woven into social prescribing research, policy and practice to foster common understanding of this concept.

Assessment of Antimicrobial Consumption in Multi-Field Hospitals with Pediatric Inpatients: Conventional vs. Novel Pediatric-Adjusted Methodologies

BACKGROUND

the objective of this study was to propose a methodology for the assessment of antimicrobial consumption (AMC) in pediatric inpatients and to estimate variances in consumption levels in multi-field hospitals with pediatric inpatients, calculated by means of the pediatric-adjusted methodology vs. the conventional methodology.

METHODS

the pediatric-adjusted methodology based on the conventional ATC/DDD method and children's DDDs (cDDD) for antimicrobials were proposed and validated in a series of probabilistic sensitivity analyses of real clinical data extracted from the receipt notes of three multi-field hospitals. Differences in AMC in multi-field hospitals with pediatric inpatients, calculated by means of the proposed methodology vs. the conventional methodology, were assessed for a virtual cohort of inpatients, with the pediatric share increasing by 1%.

RESULTS

in children ≤12 years old, assessment by the standard methodology resulted in a 59% underestimation of AMC from the levels based on prescribed doses, vs. a 25% underestimation for the proposed methodology. In a mixed-age virtual population of inpatients, the underestimation of consumption levels rose to 321% for the ATC/DDD methodology compared to the proposed one.

CONCLUSIONS

the proposed methodology demonstrated a higher accuracy of AMC estimates compared to the conventional one and can be considered for the quantification of antimicrobial utilization in pediatric institutions and multi-field hospitals with a substantial share of pediatric inpatients.

The vicious cycle of the public's irrational use of antibiotics for upper respiratory tract infections: A mixed methods systematic review

Background

The public's irrational use of antibiotics for upper respiratory tract infections (URTIs) is prevalent worldwide. This study aims to synthesize evidence on how people use antibiotics to treat URTIs, its prevalence and determinants.

Methods

A mixed methods systematic review was conducted using a convergent segregated approach. Relevant studies were searched from PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science. A qualitative analysis was initiated, exploring the public's antibiotic use experience for URTIS based on the Consumer Behavior Model (CBM). This was followed by a quantitative synthesis, tapping into the prevalence and predictors of public behavior in antibiotic usage for URTIs. The segregated syntheses complemented each other and were further integrated.

Results

A total of 86 studies were included: 48 quantitative, 30 qualitative, eight mixed methods studies. The included studies were conducted in Europe (n = 29), Asia (n = 27) and North America (n = 21), assessing the behaviors of patients (n = 46), their parents or caregivers (n = 31), or both (n = 9). Eleven themes emerged covering the six CBM stages: need recognition, information searching, alternative evaluation, antibiotic obtaining, antibiotic consumption, and post-consumption evaluation. The six stages reinforce each other, forming a vicious cycle. The high prevalence of the public's irrational use of antibiotics for URTIs is evident despite the high heterogeneity of the studies (ranging from 0.0 to 92.7%). The perceived seriousness of illness and misbelief in antibiotics were identified consistently across the studies as the major motivation driving the public's irrational use of antibiotics for URTIs. However, individual capacity (e.g., knowledge) and opportunity (e.g., contextual restriction) in reducing antibiotic use have mixed effect.

Conclusion

Systemic interventions concerning both supply and demand sides are warranted. The public needs to be educated about the appropriate management of URTIs and health care providers need to re-shape public attitudes toward antibiotic use for URTIs through communication and prescribing practices.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero, identifier: CRD42021266407.

Planning and Reporting Effective Web-Based RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method Panels: Literature Review and Preliminary Recommendations

BACKGROUND

The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method (RAM), a variant of the Delphi Method, was developed to synthesize existing evidence and elicit the clinical judgement of medical experts on the appropriate treatment of specific clinical presentations. Technological advances now allow researchers to conduct expert panels on the internet, offering a cost-effective and convenient alternative to the traditional RAM. For example, the Department of Veterans Affairs recently used a web-based RAM to validate clinical recommendations for de-intensifying routine primary care services. A substantial literature describes and tests various aspects of the traditional RAM in health research; yet we know comparatively less about how researchers implement web-based expert panels.

OBJECTIVE

The objectives of this study are twofold: (1) to understand how the web-based RAM process is currently used and reported in health research and (2) to provide preliminary reporting guidance for researchers to improve the transparency and reproducibility of reporting practices.

METHODS

The PubMed database was searched to identify studies published between 2009 and 2019 that used a web-based RAM to measure the appropriateness of medical care. Methodological data from each article were abstracted. The following categories were assessed: composition and characteristics of the web-based expert panels, characteristics of panel procedures, results, and panel satisfaction and engagement.

RESULTS

Of the 12 studies meeting the eligibility criteria and reviewed, only 42% (5/12) implemented the full RAM process with the remaining studies opting for a partial approach. Among those studies reporting, the median number of participants at first rating was 42. While 92% (11/12) of studies involved clinicians, 50% (6/12) involved multiple stakeholder types. Our review revealed that the studies failed to report on critical aspects of the RAM process. For example, no studies reported response rates with the denominator of previous rounds, 42% (5/12) did not provide panelists with feedback between rating periods, 50% (6/12) either did not have or did not report on the panel discussion period, and 25% (3/12) did not report on quality measures to assess aspects of the panel process (eg, satisfaction with the process).

CONCLUSIONS

Conducting web-based RAM panels will continue to be an appealing option for researchers seeking a safe, efficient, and democratic process of expert agreement. Our literature review uncovered inconsistent reporting frameworks and insufficient detail to evaluate study outcomes. We provide preliminary recommendations for reporting that are both timely and important for producing replicable, high-quality findings. The need for reporting standards is especially critical given that more people may prefer to participate in web-based rather than in-person panels due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.

Optimizing antibiotic use in Indonesia: A systematic review and evidence synthesis to inform opportunities for intervention

Background

A major driver of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) and poor clinical outcomes is suboptimal antibiotic use, although data are lacking in low-resource settings. We reviewed studies on systemic antibiotic use (WHO ATC/DDD category J01) for human health in Indonesia, and synthesized available evidence to identify opportunities for intervention.

Methods

We systematically searched five international and national databases for eligible peer-reviewed articles, in English and Indonesian, published between 1 January 2000 and 1 June 2021 including: (1) antibiotic consumption; (2) prescribing appropriateness; (3) antimicrobial stewardship (AMS); (4) consumers' and providers' perceptions. Two independent reviewers included studies and extracted data. Study-level data were summarized using random-effects model meta-analysis for consumption and prescribing appropriateness, effect direction analysis for antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) interventions, and qualitative synthesis for perception surveys. (PROSPERO: CRD42019134641).

Findings

Of 9323 search hits, we included 100 reports on antibiotic consumption (20), prescribing appropriateness (49), AMS interventions (13), and/or perception (25) (8 categorized in >1 domain). The pooled estimate of overall antibiotic consumption was 134.8 DDD per 100 bed-days (95%CI 82.5-187.0) for inpatients and 121.1 DDD per 1000 inhabitants per day (10.4-231.8) for outpatients. Ceftriaxone, levofloxacin, and ampicillin were the most consumed antibiotics in inpatients, and amoxicillin, ciprofloxacin, and cefadroxil in outpatients. Pooled estimates for overall appropriate prescribing (according to Gyssens method) were 33.5% (18.1-53.4) in hospitals and 49.4% (23.7-75.4) in primary care. Pooled estimates for appropriate prescribing (according to reference guidelines) were, in hospitals, 99.7% (97.4-100) for indication, 84.9% (38.5-98.0) for drug choice, and 6.1% (0.2-63.2) for overall appropriateness, and, in primary care, 98.9% (60.9-100) for indication, 82.6% (50.5-95.7) for drug choice and 10.5% (0.8-62.6) for overall appropriateness. Studies to date evaluating bundled AMS interventions, although sparse and heterogeneous, suggested favourable effects on antibiotic consumption, prescribing appropriateness, guideline compliance, and patient outcomes. Key themes identified in perception surveys were lack of community antibiotic knowledge, and common non-prescription antibiotic self-medication.

Interpretation

Context-specific intervention strategies are urgently needed to improve appropriate antibiotic use in Indonesian hospitals and communities, with critical evidence gaps concerning the private and informal healthcare sectors.

Funding

Wellcome Africa Asia Programme Vietnam.

Optimizing antibiotic therapies to reduce the risk of bacterial resistance

The incidence of infections caused by bacteria that are resistant to antibiotics is constantly increasing. In Europe alone, it has been estimated that each year about 33'000 deaths are attributable to such infections. One important driver of antimicrobial resistance is the use and abuse of antibiotics in human medicine. Inappropriate prescribing of antibiotics is still very frequent: up to 50% of all antimicrobials prescribed in humans might be unnecessary and several studies show that at least 50% of antibiotic treatments are inadequate, depending on the setting. Possible strategies to optimize antibiotic use in everyday clinical practice and to reduce the risk of inducing bacterial resistance include: the implementation of rapid microbiological diagnostics for identification and antimicrobial susceptibility testing, the use of inflammation markers to guide initiation and duration of therapies, the reduction of standard durations of antibiotic courses, the individualization of antibiotic therapies and dosing considering pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics targets, and avoiding antibiotic classes carrying a higher risk for induction of bacterial resistance. Importantly, measures to improve antibiotic prescribing and antibiotic stewardship programs should focus on facilitating clinical reasoning and improving prescribing environment in order to remove any barriers to good prescribing.

Unraveling the Nature of Antibiotics: Is It a Cure or a New Hurdle to the Patient Treatment?

Antimicrobial resistance is an increasing problem worldwide that has been exacerbated by antibiotic misuse worldwide. Growing antibiotic resistance can be attributed to as well as leads to severe infections, complications, prolonged hospital admissions, and higher mortality. One of the most important goals of administering antimicrobials is to avoid establishing antibiotic resistance during therapy. This can be done by drastically lowering worldwide antimicrobial usage, both in present and future. While current management methods to legislate antimicrobials and educate the healthcare community on the challenges are beneficial, they do not solve the problem of attaining an overall reduction in antimicrobial usage in humans. Application of rapid microbiological diagnostics for identification and antimicrobial susceptibility testing, use of inflammation markers to guide initiation and duration of therapies, reduction of standard antibiotic course durations, individualization of antibiotic treatments, and dosing considering pharmacokinetics are all possible strategies to optimize antibiotic use in everyday clinical practice and reduce the risk of inducing bacterial resistance. Furthermore, to remove any impediments to proper prescribing, strategies to improve antibiotic prescribing and antibiotic stewardship programs should enable clinical reasoning and enhance the prescribing environment. In addition, the well-established association between antimicrobial usage and resistance should motivate efforts to develop antimicrobial treatment regimens that facilitate the evolution of resistance. This review discusses the role of antibiotics, their current application in human medicine, and how the resistance has evolved to the existing antibiotics based on the existing literature.

Non-compliance with clinical guidelines increases the risk of complications after primary total hip and knee joint replacement surgery

BACKGROUND

Total hip and total knee replacement (THR/TKR) are common and effective surgeries to reduce the pain and disability associated with arthritis but are associated with small but significant risks of preventable complications such as surgical site infection (SSI) and venous-thrombo-embolism (VTE). This study aims to determine the degree to which hospital care was compliant with clinical guidelines for the prevention of SSI and VTE after THR/TKR; and whether non-compliant prophylaxis is associated with increased risk of complications.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

A prospective multi-centre cohort study was undertaken in consenting adults with osteoarthritis undergoing elective primary TKR/THR at one of 19 high-volume Australian public or private hospitals. Data were collected prior to surgery and for one-year post-surgery. Four adjusted logistic regression analyses were undertaken to explore associations between binary non-compliance and the risk of surgical complications: (1) composite (simultaneous) non-compliance with both (VTE and antibiotic) guidelines and composite complications [all-cause mortality, VTE, readmission/reoperation for joint-related reasons (one-year) and non-joint-related reasons (35-days)], (2) VTE non-compliance and VTE outcomes, (3) antibiotic non-compliance and any SSI, and (4) antibiotic non-compliance and deep SSI. Data were analysed for 1875 participants. Guideline non-compliance rates were high: 65% (VTE), 87% (antibiotics) and 95% (composite guideline). Composite non-compliance was not associated with composite complication (12.8% vs 8.3%, adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.41, 95%CI 0.68-3.45, p = 0.40). Non-compliance with VTE guidelines was associated with VTE outcomes (5% vs 2.4%, AOR = 2.83, 95%CI 1.59-5.28,p < 0.001). Non-compliance with antibiotic guidelines was associated with any SSI (14.8% vs 6.1%, AOR = 1.98, 95%CI 1.17-3.62,p = 0.02) but not deep infection (3.7% vs 1.2%,AOR = 2.39, 95%CI 0.85-10.00, p = 0.15).

CONCLUSIONS

We found high rates of clinical variation and statistically significant associations between non-compliance with VTE and antibiotic guidelines and increased risk of VTE and SSI, respectively. Complications after THR/TKR surgery may be decreased by improving compliance with clinical guidelines.

Establishing essential metrics for antifungal stewardship in hospitals: the results of an international Delphi survey

BACKGROUND

Guidance on assessment of the quantity and appropriateness of antifungal prescribing is required to assist hospitals to interpret data effectively and structure quality improvement programmes.

OBJECTIVES

To achieve expert consensus on a core set of antifungal stewardship (AFS) metrics and to determine their feasibility for implementation.

METHODS

A literature review was undertaken to develop a list of candidate metrics. International experts were invited to participate in sequential web-based surveys to evaluate the importance and feasibility of metrics in the area of AFS using Delphi methodology. Three surveys were completed. Consensus was predefined as ≥80% agreement on the importance of each metric.

RESULTS

Eighty-two experts consented to participate from 17 different countries. Response rate for each survey was >80%. The panel included adult and paediatric physicians, microbiologists and pharmacists with diverse content expertise. Consensus was achieved for 38 metrics considered important to routinely include in AFS programmes, and related to antifungal consumption (n = 5), quality of antifungal prescribing and management of invasive fungal infection (IFI) (n = 24), and clinical outcomes (n = 9). Twenty-one consensus metrics were considered to have moderate to high feasibility for routine collection.

CONCLUSIONS

The identified core AFS metrics will provide a framework to comprehensively assess the quantity and quality of antifungal prescribing within hospitals to develop quality improvement programmes aimed at improving IFI prevention, management and patient-centred outcomes. A standardized approach will support collaboration and benchmarking to monitor the efficacy of current prophylaxis and treatment guidelines, and will provide important feedback to guideline developers.

Repeated point prevalence survey on antimicrobial use in a university hospital: what have we learned?

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the quality of antimicrobial prescribing, at the Department of Internal Medicine University Hospital Centre Rijeka, by assessing the necessity for antimicrobial treatment and adherence to the local Guidelines for hospital antimicrobial drug use and to compare results with previously conducted point prevalence surveys (PPSs).

METHODS

A PPS was conducted on 7th May 2019. Demographic and relevant clinical data of each patient receiving systemic antimicrobials were recorded anonymously in a patient-specific form. The appropriateness of antibiotic prescribing was assessed as adherence to the fourth edition of the Guidelines for hospital antimicrobial drug use.

KEY FINDINGS

One hundred and seventy-one patients were hospitalized at the Department of Internal Medicine; 37.4% (n = 64) of patients received 102 prescriptions for an antimicrobial drug [62.8% (n = 64) of prescriptions were for intravenous and 37.2% (n = 38) for oral administration]. Of these, 52 were treated for an identified existing infection, 5 were treated for an unknown indication and 7 received antibiotics as prophylaxis. The necessity for antimicrobial treatment was unclear in 19.3% (n = 11) of cases. The antimicrobials were prescribed according to the Guidelines in 65.4% (n = 34) of cases. Adherence to the Guidelines when treating lower respiratory tract infections, urinary tract infections and gastrointestinal tract infections was 47.8%, 55.6% and 92.9%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study revealed antibiotic prescription frequency similar to EU/EEA average and high percentage of unjustified antimicrobial treatment introduction. The rate of adherence to the Guidelines was lower than those observed in western countries. The results lay a basis for tailoring antimicrobial stewardship programs/activities.

The General Population's Inappropriate Behaviors and Misunderstanding of Antibiotic Use in China: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The general population has increasingly become the key contributor to irrational antibiotic use in China, which fuels the emergence of antibiotic resistance. This study aimed to estimate the prevalence of the general population’s irrational use behaviors of antibiotics and identify the potential reasons behind them. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed concerning four main behaviors relevant to easy access and irrational use of antibiotics and common misunderstandings among the population about antibiotics. Four databases were searched, and studies published before 28 February 2021 were retrieved. Medium and high-level quality studies were included. Random effects meta-analysis was performed to calculate the prevalence of the general population’s irrational behaviors and misunderstandings relevant to antibiotic use. A total of 8468 studies were retrieved and 78 met the criteria and were included. The synthesis showed the public can easily obtain unnecessary antibiotics, with an estimated 37% (95% CI: 29–46) of the population demanding antibiotics from physicians and 47% (95% CI: 38–57) purchasing non-prescription antibiotics from pharmacies. This situation is severe in the western area of China. People also commonly inappropriately use antibiotics by not following antibiotic prescriptions (pooled estimate: 48%, 95% CI: 41–55) and preventatively use antibiotics for non-indicated diseases (pooled estimate: 35%, 95% CI: 29–42). Misunderstanding of antibiotic use was also popular among people, including incorrect antibiotic recognition, wrong antibiotic use indication, inappropriate usage, and ignorance of potential adverse outcomes. Over-and inappropriate use of antibiotics is evident in China and a multifaceted antibiotic strategy targeted at the general population is urgently required.

Assessment of Appropriateness of Antimicrobial Therapy in Resource-Constrained Settings: Development and Piloting of a Novel Tool-AmRAT

Inappropriate antimicrobial prescribing is considered to be the leading cause of high burden of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in resource-constrained lower- and middle-income countries. Under its global action plan, the World Health Organization has envisaged tackling the AMR threat through promotion of rational antibiotic use among prescribers. Given the lack of consensus definitions and other associated challenges, we sought to devise and validate an Antimicrobial Rationality Assessment Tool-AmRAT-for standardizing the assessment of appropriateness of antimicrobial prescribing. A consensus algorithm was developed by a multidisciplinary team consisting of intensivists, internal medicine practitioners, clinical pharmacologists, and infectious disease experts. The tool was piloted by 10 raters belonging to three groups of antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) personnel: Master of Pharmacology (M.Sc.) (n = 3, group A), Doctor of Medicine (MD) residents (n = 3, group B), and DM residents in clinical pharmacology (n = 4, group C) using retrospective patient data from 30 audit and feedback forms collected as part of an existing AMS program. Percentage agreement and the kappa (κ) coefficients were used to measure inter-rater agreements amongst themselves and with expert opinion. Sensitivity and specificity estimates were analyzed comparing their assessments against the gold standard. For the overall assessment of rationality, the mean percent agreement with experts was 76.7% for group A, 68.9% for group B, and 77.5% for group C. The kappa values indicated moderate agreement for all raters in group A (κ 0.47-0.57), and fair to moderate in group B (κ 0.22-0.46) as well as group C (κ 0.37-0.60). Sensitivity and specificity for the same were 80% and 68.6%, respectively. Though evaluated by raters with diverse educational background and variable AMS experience in this pilot study, our tool demonstrated high percent agreement and good sensitivity and specificity, assuring confidence in its utility for assessing appropriateness of antimicrobial prescriptions in resource-constrained healthcare environments.

Organization of antibiotic stewardship in Europe: the way to go

It is more than two decades ago that a European Union conference on "The Microbial Threat" hosted by the Danish Government in Copenhagen in September 1998 issued recommendations to encourage good practice in the use of antimicrobial agents and reduce inappropriate prescribing. Essential components of those recommendations were antimicrobial teams in hospitals and the use of feedback to prescribers as well as educational activities. Two decades later, important surveillance systems on both antimicrobial resistance as well as on antibiotic consumption are functioning at the European level and in most European countries; European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST) has thoroughly re-evaluated, standardized and harmonized antibiotic susceptibility testing and breakpoints; there have been educational activities in many countries; and stewardship teams are now included in many guidelines and policy papers and recommendations. Yet, antimicrobial resistance problems in Europe have shifted from methicillin-resistant Staphylococus aureus (MRSA) to vancomycin-resistent Enterococcus faecium (VRE) and to multidrug-resistant gramnegative bacteria, while antibiotic consumption volumes, trends and patterns across countries do not show major and highly significant improvements. The way to go further is to recognize that better prescribing comes at a cost and requires investment in expert personnel, practice guideline drafting, and implementation aids, and, secondly, the setting of clear goals and quantitative targets for prescribing quality.

Accuracy of and prescriber perceptions related to documenting antibiotic indications during order entry at an academic medical center

PURPOSE

To assess the accuracy of antibiotic indication documentation provided during order entry and prescriber perceptions of the requirement to specify indications.

METHODS

Patients who received 1 of 6 selected antibiotics from May 1 through June 30, 2017, were identified. Records of 30 randomly selected patients who received each study antibiotic were retrospectively reviewed. The primary endpoint was indication accuracy, defined as agreement of the indication entered during order entry with that documented in progress notes at the time of order entry. Secondary endpoints included correlation of entered indication and final diagnosis for empiric antibiotics. A brief survey was emailed to prescribers to assess the burden and perceptions of requiring an indication during order entry.

RESULTS

Four thousand five hundred twenty-four patients received 1 or more doses of a study antibiotic. For the 180 patients selected for evaluation, 89.4% of indications were accurate. Indications for antibiotics ordered for prophylaxis were more likely to be inaccurate than those for empiric or definitive antibiotics (accuracy rates of 46%, 94%, and 92%, respectively, p < 0.05). For empiric antibiotics, 78.5% of indications documented at order entry matched the final diagnosis. Two hundred fifty-four of 863 prescribers (29%) responded to the survey request. Most respondents felt that documenting the indication took no more than 20 seconds, was a "minor nuisance" or "occasionally burdensome," and had no impact on their consideration of antibiotic appropriateness.

CONCLUSION

With the exception of prophylaxis, the indications documented during order entry were sufficiently accurate to assist antimicrobial stewardship efforts. Although indication documentation was perceived as a minor burden, surveyed prescribers indicated it had only a minimal beneficial effect on antibiotic prescribing.

Clinimetric properties and suitability of selected quality indicators for assessing antibiotic use in hospitalized adults: a multicentre point prevalence study in 24 hospitals in Germany

OBJECTIVES

The capability to measure and monitor the quality of antibiotic prescribing is an important component of antibiotic stewardship (ABS) programmes. Several catalogues of consensus-based structure and process-of-care quality indicators (QIs) have been proposed, but only a few studies have tested and validated ABS QIs in practice tests. This multicentre study determined the clinimetric properties and suitability of a set of 33 process QIs for ABS that had earlier been developed and in part recommended in a German-Austrian hospital ABS practice guideline.

METHODS

Two point prevalence surveys were conducted in a convenience sample of 24 acute care hospitals throughout Germany, and data of all screened adult inpatients with prescription of a systemic antibiotic at a given day (n=4310) were included in the study. For each QI, the following clinimetric properties were assessed: applicability, feasibility, performance, case mix stability and interobserver reliability.

RESULTS

Eighteen QIs were considered sufficiently feasible, applicable and reliable, and had adequate room for improvement. The finally selected QIs primarily cover antibiotic therapy of common infections (bloodstream infection, pneumonia and urinary tract infection), while two of the QIs each address surgical prophylaxis and general aspects of antibiotic administration.

CONCLUSIONS

Practice tests may be important to test the suitability of consensus process-of-care QIs in the field of hospital ABS. The 18 selected QIs considered suitable enough for hospital ABS in this study should be regarded as priority QIs useful for internal quality control and assurance. More research and additional practice tests may be needed to confirm their suitability for external quality assessment schemes.

Ensuring Antibiotic Development, Equitable Availability, and Responsible Use of Effective Antibiotics: Recommendations for Multisectoral Action

Antibiotic resistance is a growing threat to global public health. The World Health Organization's Global Action Plan on Antimicrobial Resistance recommends engaging multisectoral stakeholders to tackle the issue. However, so far, few studies have addressed barriers to antibiotic development, equitable availability, and responsible antibiotic use from the perspective of stakeholders outside healthcare facilities or patient communities: the so-called third-party stakeholders. Third-party stakeholders include, inter alia, governments, regulatory agencies, and professionals working in antibiotic research and development and medical ethics. This viewpoint provides an overview of barriers to antibiotic development, equitable availability of effective antibiotics, and the responsible use of antibiotics. The barriers were identified in an exploratory, qualitative interview study with an illustrative sample of 12 third-party stakeholders. Recommendations to lift these barriers are presented, together with examples of recently-made progress. The recommendations should guide future antibiotic policies and multisectoral policy action.

Antimicrobial stewardship programs; a two-part narrative review of step-wise design and issues of controversy Part I: step-wise design of an antimicrobial stewardship program

Regardless of one's opinion of antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs), it is hardly possible to work in hospital care and not be exposed to the term or its practical effects. Despite the term being relatively new, the number of publications in the field is vast, including several excellent reviews of general and specific aspects. Work in antimicrobial stewardship is complex, and includes not only aspects of infectious disease and microbiology, but also of epidemiology, genetics, behavioural psychology, systems science, economics and ethics, to name a few. This review aims to take several of these aspects and the scientific evidence of antimicrobial stewardship studies and merge them into two questions: How should we design ASPs based on what we know today? And which are the most essential unanswered questions regarding antimicrobial stewardship on a broader scale? This narrative review is written in two separate parts aiming to provide answers to the two questions. This first part is written as a step-wise approach to designing a stewardship intervention based on the pillars of unmet need, feasibility, scientific evidence and necessary core elements. It is written mainly as a guide to someone new to the field. It is sorted into five distinct steps: (a) focusing on designing aims; (b) assessing performance and local barriers to rational antimicrobial use; (c) deciding on intervention technique; (d) practical, tailored design including core element inclusion; and (e) evaluation and sustainability. The second part, published separately, formulates ten critical questions on controversies in the field of antimicrobial stewardship. It is aimed at clinicians and researchers with stewardship experience and strives to promote discussion, not to provide answers.

Challenges and research priorities to progress the impact of antimicrobial stewardship

Antimicrobial stewardship programmes have been playing an important role in patient care and hospital policies. These programmes are now recognised as formal strategies for curbing the upward trend in antibiotic resistance and for improving the appropriate antimicrobial and antifungal use. The role of such programs in the era of antimicrobial resistance presents several unique challenges and opportunities, most notably in the diagnostic and therapeutic setting. Controversies remain regarding the most effective interventions and the appropriate design to evaluate their impact. In this review, based on rounds of discussion, we explain the most important challenges faced by antibiotic stewardship and antifungal stewardship programmes. We also try to suggest areas for further research.

An Innovative Strategy for the Effective Reduction of MDR Pathogens from the Nosocomial Environment

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is currently one of the main concerns for human health.Due to its rapid increase and global diffusion, several common microbial infections might become not curable in the future decades, making it impossible to apply other lifesaver therapies, such as transplant or chemotherapy.AMR is frequently observed in hospital pathogens, due to selective pressure exerted by antibiotic use, and consistently with this, in the recent years, many actions have been proposed to limit AMR spread, including hygiene measures for hospital professionals and a wiser antibiotic usage.Indeed, the hospital environment itself represents a reservoir of pathogens, whose control was so far addressed by conventional sanitation procedures, which however cannot prevent recontamination and might further favour the selection of resistant strains.Here we report the results collected by studying an innovative sanitation strategy based on the use of probiotic bacteria, capable of reducing in a stable way the surface load of pathogens and their AMR. Collected data suggest that this system might contribute significantly to AMR control and might be thus considered as one of the tools for AMR and infection prevention and control.

Role of Education in Antimicrobial Stewardship

The ability to treat infectious diseases with antimicrobials is an essential component of medical management. Antimicrobial therapy is based on the characteristics of the patient, drug, microorganisms causing the infection, and colonizing flora. Prudent antibiotic use is the only option to delay the emergence of resistance. Training in infectious diseases and knowledge of the principles of responsible antibiotic prescribing and uses must be improved. To change practice, health care professionals should be educated at all levels of their training.

Quality indicators assessing antibiotic use in the outpatient setting: a systematic review followed by an international multidisciplinary consensus procedure

Objectives

Quality indicators (QIs) assessing the appropriateness of antibiotic use are essential to identify targets for improvement and guide antibiotic stewardship interventions. The aim of this study was to develop a set of QIs for the outpatient setting from a global perspective.

Methods

A systematic literature review was performed by searching MEDLINE and relevant web sites in order to retrieve a list of QIs. These indicators were extracted from published trials, guidelines, literature reviews or consensus procedures. This evidence-based set of QIs was evaluated by a multidisciplinary, international group of stakeholders using a RAND-modified Delphi procedure, using two online questionnaires and a face-to-face meeting between them. Stakeholders appraised the QIs' relevance using a nine-point Likert scale. This work is part of the DRIVE-AB project.

Results

The systematic literature review identified 43 unique QIs, from 54 studies and seven web sites. Twenty-five stakeholders from 14 countries participated in the consensus procedure. Ultimately, 32 QIs were retained, with a high level of agreement. The set of QIs included structure, process and outcome indicators, targeting both high- and middle- to low-income settings. Most indicators focused on general practice, addressing the common indications for antibiotic use in the community (particularly urinary and respiratory tract infections), and the organization of healthcare facilities. Twelve indicators specifically addressed outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT).

Conclusions

We identified a set of 32 outpatient QIs to measure the appropriateness of antibiotic use. These QIs can be used to identify targets for improvement and to evaluate the effects of antibiotic stewardship interventions.

Variation in antibiotic use among and within different settings: a systematic review

Objectives

Variation in antibiotic use may reflect inappropriate use. We aimed to systematically describe the variation in measures for antibiotic use among settings or providers. This study was conducted as part of the innovative medicines initiative (IMI)-funded international project DRIVE-AB.

Methods

We searched for studies published in MEDLINE from January 2004 to January 2015 reporting variation in measures for systemic antibiotic use (e.g. DDDs) in inpatient and outpatient settings. The ratio between a study's reported maximum and minimum values of a given measure [maximum:minimum ratio (MMR)] was calculated as a measure of variation. Similar measures were grouped into categories and when possible the overall median ratio and IQR were calculated.

Results

One hundred and forty-three studies were included, of which 85 (59.4%) were conducted in Europe and 12 (8.4%) in low- to middle-income countries. Most studies described the variation in the quantity of antibiotic use in the inpatient setting (81/143, 56.6%), especially among hospitals (41/81, 50.6%). The most frequent measure was DDDs with different denominators, reported in 23/81 (28.4%) inpatient studies and in 28/62 (45.2%) outpatient studies. For this measure, we found a median MMR of 3.7 (IQR 2.6-5.0) in 4 studies reporting antibiotic use in ICUs in DDDs/1000 patient-days and a median MMR of 2.3 (IQR 1.5-3.2) in 18 studies reporting outpatient antibiotic use in DDDs/1000 inhabitant-days. Substantial variation was also identified in other measures.

Conclusions

Our review confirms the large variation in antibiotic use even across similar settings and providers. Data from low- and middle-income countries are under-represented. Further studies should try to better elucidate reasons for the observed variation to facilitate interventions that reduce unwarranted practice variation. In addition, the heterogeneity of reported measures clearly shows that there is need for standardization.

Quality indicators for responsible antibiotic use in the inpatient setting: a systematic review followed by an international multidisciplinary consensus procedure

Background

This study was conducted as part of the Driving Reinvestment in Research and Development and Responsible Antibiotic Use (DRIVE-AB) project and aimed to develop generic quality indicators (QIs) for responsible antibiotic use in the inpatient setting.

Methods

A RAND-modified Delphi method was applied. First, QIs were identified by a systematic review. A complementary search was performed on web sites of relevant organizations. Duplicates were removed and disease and patient-specific QIs were combined into generic indicators. The relevance of these QIs was appraised by a multidisciplinary international stakeholder panel through two questionnaires and an in-between consensus meeting.

Results

The systematic review retrieved 70 potential generic QIs. The QIs were appraised by 25 international stakeholders with diverse backgrounds (medical community, public health, patients, antibiotic research and development, regulators, governments). Ultimately, 51 QIs were selected in consensus. QIs with the highest relevance score included: (i) an antibiotic plan should be documented in the medical record at the start of the antibiotic treatment; (ii) the results of bacteriological susceptibility testing should be documented in the medical record; (iii) the local guidelines should correspond to the national guidelines but should be adapted based on local resistance patterns; (iv) an antibiotic stewardship programme should be in place at the healthcare facility; and (v) allergy status should be taken into account when antibiotics are prescribed.

Conclusions

This systematic and stepwise method combining evidence from literature and stakeholder opinion led to multidisciplinary international consensus on generic inpatient QIs that can be used globally to assess the quality of antibiotic use.

Patient-related determinants of antibiotic use: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to assess patient-related determinants potentially influencing antibiotic use.

METHODS

Studies published in MEDLINE until 30 September 2015 were searched. We included: qualitative studies describing patients' self-reported determinants of antibiotic use; and quantitative studies on either self-reported or objectively assessed determinants associated with antibiotic use. Whenever possible, reported determinants were categorized as 'barriers' or 'facilitators' of responsible antibiotic use.

RESULTS

A total of 87 studies from 33 countries were included. Seventy-five (86.2%) were quantitative and described self-reported (45/75, 60.0%), objectively assessed (20/75, 26.7%) or self-reported and objectively assessed (10/75, 13.3%) patient-related determinants. Twelve (12/87, 13.8%) were qualitative studies or had a qualitative and quantitative component. Eighty-six of the studies (98.8%) concerned the outpatient setting. We identified seven broad categories of determinants having an impact on different aspects of antibiotic use (in descending order of frequency): demographic and socio-economic characteristics, patient-doctor interactions (e.g. counselling), treatment characteristics (e.g. administration frequency), attitudes (e.g. expecting antibiotics), access to treatment (e.g. patients' direct costs), characteristics of the condition for which the antibiotic was prescribed (e.g. duration of symptoms), knowledge (e.g. regarding indications for treatment). Most determinants were classified as 'barriers' to responsible antibiotic use.

CONCLUSION

A large variety of patient-related determinants impact antibiotic use. The most easily 'modifiable' determinants concern patient-doctor interactions, treatment characteristics and knowledge. Data from the inpatient setting and low- and middle-income countries were underrepresented. Further studies should develop and test interventions that take these determinants into account with the ultimate aim of improving responsible use of antibiotics.

Views and experiences with regard to antibiotic use of hospitalized patients in five European countries: a qualitative descriptive study

OBJECTIVES

To explore inpatients experiences and views with regard to antibiotics in five European hospitals.

METHODS

Qualitative study where a patient-centred framework was used to explore inpatients' experiences concerning antibiotic treatment. A purposeful sample of inpatients treated with antibiotics in five hospitals participated in interviews (all centres) and focus groups (Switzerland only).

RESULTS

A total of 31 interviews (five in Belgium, ten in Croatia, nine in France, five in the Netherlands and two in Switzerland) and three focus groups (in Switzerland, 11 participants) were performed. The median age of participants was 61 years (range 33-86 years). The following main themes emerged: (a) patients trust doctors to take the best decisions for them even though communication concerning different antibiotic-related aspects is often insufficient, (b) patients feel that doctors do not prioritize communication due to time constraints and do not seem to adapt information based on patients' preferences, (c) patients differ in their wish to be informed but overall want to be informed on the main aspects in an understandable way, (d) patients often find reassurance in sharing information about their antibiotic treatment with close family, (e) professionals should explore patients' preferences to be involved or not in shared decision making for antibiotic treatment.

CONCLUSION

Inpatients often doubt their ability to understand medical information and trust their physicians to take the best decisions for them. Tailored strategies that inform hospitalized patients, acknowledging their concerns and preferences, may be useful to promote patient involvement and to improve communication regarding antibiotic use.