Metrics to assess the quantity of antibiotic use in the outpatient setting: a systematic review followed by an international multidisciplinary consensus procedure

Diagnosis-linked antibiotic prescribing quality indicators: demonstrating feasibility using practice-based routine primary care data, reliability, validity and their potential in antimicrobial stewardship

BACKGROUND

Quality indicators (QIs) can be used to obtain valuable insights into prescribing quality. Five quantitative and nine diagnosis-linked QIs, aiming to provide general practitioners (GP) with feedback on their antibiotic prescribing quantity and quality, were previously developed and evaluated in a controlled study.

OBJECTIVE

To confirm, in a larger non-controlled study, the feasibility of using routinely collected and extracted electronic patient records to calculate the diagnosis-linked QI outcomes for antibiotic prescribing, and their reliability and validity.

METHODS

Retrospective study involving 299 Dutch general practices using routine care data (2018-2020). QIs describe total antibiotic and subgroup prescribing, prescribing percentages and first-choice prescribing for several clinical diagnoses. Practice variation in QI outcomes, inter-QI outcome correlations and sensitivity of QI outcomes to pandemic-induced change were determined.

RESULTS

QI outcomes were successfully obtained for 278/299 practices. With respect to reliability, outcomes for 2018 and 2019 were comparable, between-practice variation in outcomes was similar to the controlled pilot, and inter-QI outcome correlations were as expected, for example: high prescribing of second choice antibiotics with low first-choice prescribing for clinical diagnoses. Validity was confirmed by their sensitivity to pandemic-induced change: total antibiotic prescribing decreased from 282 prescriptions/1000 registered patients in 2018 to 216 in 2020, with a decrease in prescribing percentages for upper and lower respiratory infections, from 26% to 18.5%, and from 28% to 16%.

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirmed the fit-for-purpose (feasibility, reliability and validity) of the antibiotic prescribing QIs (including clinical diagnosis-linked ones) using routinely registered primary health care data as a source. This feedback can therefore be used in antibiotic stewardship programmes to improve GPs' prescribing routines.

Identifying General Practitioners' Antibiotic Prescribing Profiles Based on National Health Reimbursement Data

Background

Antibiotic selection pressure in human medicine is a significant driver of antibiotic resistance in humans. The primary aspect of antibiotic consumption is associated with general practitioner (GP) prescriptions. We aimed to identify prescriber profiles for targeted antimicrobial stewardship programs using novel indicators.

Methods

A cross-sectional study was conducted in 2018 investigating GPs' antibiotic prescriptions in a French department, utilizing the reimbursement database of the national health service. Three antibiotic prescribing indicators were used. Specific targets were established for each indicator to identify the antibiotic prescribers most likely contributing to the emergence of resistance.

Results

Over 2018, we had 2,908,977 visits to 784 GPs, leading to 431,549 antibiotic prescriptions. Variations between GPs were shown by the 3 indicators. The median antibiotic prescription rate per visit was 13.6% (interquartile range [IQR], 9.8%-17.7%). Median ratios of the prescriptions of low-impact antibiotics to the prescriptions of high-impact antibiotics and of amoxicillin prescriptions to amoxicillin-clavulanic acid prescriptions were 2.5 (IQR, 1.7-3.7) and 2.94 (IQR, 1.7-5), respectively. We found 163 (21%) high prescribers of antibiotics with 3 distinct patterns: The first group overuses broad-spectrum antibiotics but without an overprescription rate per visit, the second group displays an overprescription rate but no excessive use of broad-spectrum antibiotics, and the third group shows both an overprescription rate and excessive use of broad-spectrum antibiotics.

Conclusions

Prescription-based indicators enable the identification of distinct profiles of antibiotic prescribers. This identification may allow for targeted implementation of stewardship programs focused on the specific prescribing patterns of each profile.

Impact of a public commitment charter, a non-prescription pad and an antibiotic information leaflet to improve antibiotic prescription among general practitioners: A randomised controlled study

BACKGROUND

This study evaluated the effect of a multifaceted antibiotic stewardship intervention on the overall prescription of systemic antibiotics in primary care. Secondary objectives evaluated the effect on the prescription of broad-spectrum antibiotics and the seasonal variation of both total antibiotic and quinolone prescriptions, as a proxy for unnecessary prescribing.

METHODS

This pragmatic, randomised, controlled, before-after intervention study was conducted among general practitioners (GPs) who over prescribe antibiotics in Lorraine, France (Intervention group, n = 109; Control group, n = 236; Before period, 01/10/2017-30/09/2018; After period, 01/10/2018-30/09/2019). The intervention included a public commitment charter, a patient information leaflet and a non-prescription pad. Health Insurance data was obtained to calculate overall and broad-spectrum prescription rate (defined daily doses/1000 consultations) and the seasonal variation of prescriptions (%), by period. The intervention effect was measured with general linear mixed models including three independent variables (group, period and group x period interaction).

RESULTS

Overall, compared to the Before period, GPs in both groups prescribed significantly fewer systemic antibiotics (p < 0.001) and broad-spectrum antibiotics (p < 0.001) after the intervention was implemented. However, the group x period interaction did not show any evidence that the intervention had an effect on these outcomes. Nevertheless, the intervention did result in a trend towards less seasonal variation in total systemic antibiotic prescription (p = 0.052).

CONCLUSIONS

A tendency towards an effect of the intervention to reduce unnecessary antibiotic prescribing during winter months was observed. No effect was observed on the overall volume of systemic antibiotic prescription. This study invites discussion about the challenges faced when evaluating non-pharmacological interventions in primary care.

Sociodemographic characterisation of antibiotic heavy users in the Danish elderly population

AIMS

The development of effective interventions to reduce inappropriate use of antibiotics in the elderly population requires knowledge on who can benefit from such interventions. Thus, we aimed to identify and characterise antibiotic heavy users among elderly patients in general practice with respect to sociodemographic variables.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective nationwide register-based study on all Danish elderly citizens (⩾65 years) who redeemed an antibiotic prescription in 2017. Heavy users were defined as the 10% with the highest excess use, that is, their recorded use minus the average use for their sex, age group and comorbidity level as estimated from a linear regression model. Comparative analyses of sociodemographic characteristics (civil status, employment status, urbanity, educational level and country of origin) of heavy users and non-heavy users were performed using logistic regression models.

RESULTS

The study population consisted of 251,733 elderly individuals, who in total redeemed 573,265 prescriptions of antibiotics. Heavy users accounted for 68% of all excess use of antibiotics. In multivariable analyses, individuals with an educational level above basic schooling, non-retired, residing in an urban municipality and being born in a country outside Scandinavia all had lower odds of being a heavy user. Widowed, divorced or single individuals had higher odds of being a heavy user compared with married individuals. Relative importance analyses showed that civil status and educational level contributed considerably to the explained variance.

CONCLUSIONS

This study found an association between sociodemographic characteristics and risk of being a heavy user, indicating that sociodemographic variation exists with regard to antibiotic prescribing.

Antibiotic prescriptions among dentists across Norway and the impact of COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

The prescription of antibiotics in dental practice contributes significantly to the total use of antibiotics in primary healthcare. This study aimed to evaluate antibiotic prescription in dental practice during the years 2016-2021 in Norway and their relative contribution to national outpatient consumption and to investigate the influence of age, gender, geographic region, and COVID-19. A further aim was to review differences in prescribing patterns to verify effect of governmental strategies to reduce over-prescribing of antibiotics.

METHODS

This register study investigated the national antibiotic prescription between 2016 and 2021. Data was obtained from the Norwegian prescription register, the Norwegian Institute of Public Health and Statistics Norway. The consumption of 12 common antibiotics was measured using WHO defined daily doses (DDDs), DDD per 1000 inhabitants per day (DIDs 1000).

RESULTS

A total of 6,049,445 antibiotic prescriptions of the 12 investigated compounds were issued in primary care during the study period. Dentists accounted for 942,350 prescriptions corresponding to 15.6% of the total. An overall decrease in the number of prescriptions by health professions other than dentists during the 5 years (IRR = 0.92, 95% CI:0.92-0.93, p < 0.001) was observed. For dentists a slight increase in the number of prescriptions (IRR = 1.01, 95% CI: 1.01-1.01, p < 0.001) was seen over the study period. The increase of antibiotic prescriptions in dentistry was more pronounced during the COVID-19 pandemic. The 4 most prescribed type of antibiotics based on average number of DDDs of the total period 2016-2021 were in descending order; phenoxymethylpenicillin (1,109,150) followed by amoxicillin (126,244), clindamycin (72,565), and metronidazole (64,599). An unexpected finding was that the prescription of the combination compound amoxicillin/clavulanic acid had significantly increased in dentistry during the last 5 years. Geographic, gender, and age differences in the rates of prescriptions were also seen. The data revealed that there are seasonal variations in dental prescriptions.

CONCLUSIONS

Noticeable differences exist in prescribing patterns of antibiotics in the last 5 years. Restricted access to dental care due to COVID-19 may have resulted in increased antibiotic prescribing in dentistry as opposed to an otherwise downward trend. Despite national guidelines there is still a need for improvement of antibiotic stewardship in dentistry and to define effective methods to disseminate information.

In-hospital antibiotic use for severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbations: a retrospective observational study

BACKGROUND

The use of antibiotics in mild to severe acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) remains controversial.

AIM

To explore in-hospital antibiotic use in severe acute exacerbations of COPD (AECOPD), to analyze determinants of in-hospital antibiotic use, and to investigate its association with hospital length of stay (LOS) and in-hospital mortality.

METHODS

A retrospective, observational study was conducted in Ghent University Hospital. Severe AECOPD were defined as hospitalizations for AECOPD (ICD-10 J44.0 and J44.1) discharged between 2016 and 2021. Patients with a concomitant diagnosis of pneumonia or 'pure' asthma were excluded. An alluvial plot was used to describe antibiotic treatment patterns. Logistic regression analyses identified determinants of in-hospital antibiotic use. Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were used to compare time to discharge alive and time to in-hospital death between antibiotic-treated and non-antibiotic-treated AECOPD patients.

RESULTS

In total, 431 AECOPD patients (mean age 70 years, 63% males) were included. More than two-thirds (68%) of patients were treated with antibiotics, mainly amoxicillin-clavulanic acid. In multivariable analysis, several patient-related variables (age, body mass index (BMI), cancer), treatment-related variables (maintenance azithromycin, theophylline), clinical variables (sputum volume and body temperature) and laboratory results (C-reactive protein (CRP) levels) were associated with in-hospital antibiotic use independent of sputum purulence, neutrophil counts, inhaled corticosteroids and intensive care unit of which CRP level was the strongest determinant. The median hospital LOS was significantly longer in antibiotic-treated patients (6 days [4-10]) compared to non-antibiotic-treated patients (4 days [2-7]) (p < 0.001, Log rank test). This was indicated by a reduced probability of hospital discharge even after adjustment for age, sputum purulence, BMI, in-hospital systemic corticosteroid use and forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV₁) (adjusted hazard ratio 0.60; 95% CI 0.43; 0.84). In-hospital antibiotic use was not significantly associated with in-hospital mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

In this observational study in a Belgian tertiary hospital, in-hospital antibiotic use among patients with severe AECOPD was determined by the symptom severity of the exacerbation and the underlying COPD severity as recommended by the guidelines, but also by patient-related variables. Moreover, in-hospital antibiotic use was associated with a longer hospital stay, which may be linked to their disease severity, slower response to treatment or 'harm' due to antibiotics.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Number: B670201939030; date of registration: March 5, 2019.

International Consensus on a Dental Antibiotic Stewardship Core Outcome Set

INTRODUCTION

Antibiotic resistance is a global health crisis. Ensuring responsible, appropriate use (stewardship) is an important for keeping antibiotics working as long as possible. Around 10% of antibiotics across health care are prescribed by oral health care professionals, with high rates of unnecessary use. To maximise the value from research to optimise antibiotic use in dentistry, this study developed international consensus on a core outcome set for dental antibiotic stewardship.

METHODS

Candidate outcomes were sourced from a literature review. International participants were recruited via professional bodies, patient organisations, and social media, with at least 30 dentists, academics, and patient contributors in total. Outcomes scored "critical for inclusion" by >70% of the participants (dentists, academics, and patients) after 2 Delphi rounds were included in the core outcome set following a final consensus meeting. The study protocol was registered with the COMET Initiative and published in BMC Trials.

RESULTS

A total of 33 participants from 15 countries, including 8 low- and middle-income countries, completed both rounds of the Delphi study. Antibiotic use outcomes (eg, appropriateness of prescribing), adverse or poor outcomes (eg, complications from disease progression), and a patient-reported outcome were included in the final, agreed core set. Outcomes relating to quality, time, and cost were not included.

CONCLUSIONS

This core outcome set for dental antibiotic stewardship represents the minimum which future studies of antibiotic stewardship in dentistry should report. By supporting researchers to design and report their studies in a way meaningful to multiple stakeholders and enabling international comparisons, the oral health profession's contribution to global efforts to tackle antibiotic resistance can be further improved.

Proposed metrics to benchmark antibiotic prescribing in pediatric outpatient settings

Metrics to track and compare outpatient pediatric antibiotic prescribing are needed to improve antibiotic use and prevent unwanted consequences of antibiotic overuse. We have considered the impact and feasibility of available metrics and propose select high-priority measures for electronic reporting of pediatric outpatient antibiotic use. Streamlined use of antibiotic prescribing metrics will allow for national benchmarking, monitoring and identification of targets and goals for improvement.

Quantity Metrics and Proxy Indicators to Estimate the Volume and Appropriateness of Antibiotics Prescribed in French Nursing Homes: A Cross-sectional Observational Study Based on 2018 Reimbursement Data

BACKGROUND

Antibiotic resistance is an increasing threat to public health globally. Indicators on antibiotic prescribing are required to guide antibiotic stewardship interventions in nursing homes. However, such indicators are not available in the literature. Our main objective was to provide a set of quantity metrics and proxy indicators to estimate the volume and appropriateness of antibiotic use in nursing homes.

METHODS

Recently published articles were first used to select quantity metrics and proxy indicators, which were adapted to the French nursing home context. A cross-sectional observational study was then conducted based on reimbursement databases. We included all community-based nursing homes of the Lorraine region in northeastern France. We present descriptive statistics for quantity metrics and proxy indicators. For proxy indicators, we also assessed performance scores, clinimetric properties (measurability, applicability, and room for improvement), and conducted case-mix and cluster analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 209 nursing homes were included. We selected 15 quantity metrics and 11 proxy indicators of antibiotic use. The volume of antibiotic use varied greatly between nursing homes. Proxy indicator performance scores were low, and variability between nursing homes was high for all indicators, highlighting important room for improvement. Six of the 11 proxy indicators had good clinimetric properties. Three distinct clusters were identified according to the number of proxy indicators for which the acceptable target was reached.

CONCLUSIONS

This set of 15 quantity metrics and 11 proxy indicators may be adapted to other contexts and could be used to guide antibiotic stewardship programs in nursing homes.

White Paper: Bridging the gap between surveillance data and antimicrobial stewardship in the outpatient sector-practical guidance from the JPIAMR ARCH and COMBACTE-MAGNET EPI-Net networks

Background

The outpatient setting is a key scenario for the implementation of antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) activities, considering that overconsumption of antibiotics occurs mainly outside hospitals. This publication is the result of a joint initiative by the JPIAMR ARCH and COMBACTE-MAGNET EPI-Net networks, which is aimed at formulating a set of target actions for linking surveillance data with AMS activities in the outpatient setting.

Methods

A scoping review of the literature was carried out in three research areas: AMS leadership and accountability; antimicrobial usage and AMS; antimicrobial resistance and AMS. Consensus on the actions was reached through a RAND-modified Delphi process involving over 40 experts in infectious diseases, clinical microbiology, AMS, veterinary medicine or public health, from 18 low-, middle- and high-income countries.

Results

Evidence was retrieved from 38 documents, and an initial 25 target actions were proposed, differentiating between essential or desirable targets according to clinical relevance, feasibility and applicability to settings and resources. In the first consultation round, preliminary agreement was reached for all targets. Further to a second review, 6 statements were re-considered and 3 were deleted, leading to a final list of 22 target actions in the form of a practical checklist.

Conclusions

This White Paper is a pragmatic and flexible tool to guide the development of calibrated surveillance-based AMS interventions specific to the outpatient setting, which is characterized by substantial inter- and intra-country variability in the organization of healthcare structures, maintaining a global perspective and taking into account the feasibility of the target actions in low-resource settings.

Correlation between Antibiotic Consumption and Resistance of Invasive Streptococcus pneumoniae

There is a lack of long-term studies that correlate different metrics of antibiotic consumption and resistance of invasive S. pneumoniae. The present study aims to investigate the correlation between national outpatients total antibiotic, penicillin and broad spectrum penicillins consumption expressed in daily doses per 1000 inhabitants per day (DID) with the ATC/DDDs, WHO version of 2019 (new version) and 2018 (old version), number of prescriptions per 1000 inhabitants per year (RxIDs) and number of packages per 1000 inhabitant per day (PIDs) with the resistance of invasive S. pneumoniae in Slovenia in the period from 2000 to 2018. The prevalence of penicillin resistance of invasive S. pneumoniae decreased by 47.13%, from 19.1% to 10.1%. Decline of resistance showed the highest correlation (R = 0.86) between RxIDs followed by PID (R = 0.85) and resistance of S. pneumoniae. Higher correlation between total use of antibiotics expressed in DID WHO version 2019 (R = 0.80) than for WHO version 2018 (R = 0.78) was found. Very high (R = 0.84) correlation between use of β-lactams expressed in PID, and RxIDs (R = 0.82) and reasonable (R = 0.59) correlation expressed in DIDs version 2019 was shown as well. The consumption of broad -spectrum penicillins (J01CA and J01CR02) expressed in PID (R = 0.72) and RxIDs (0.57) correlated significantly with the resistance of S. pneumoniae as well. A new finding of this study is that RxIDs correlated better with the resistance of S. pneumoniae than total consumption of antibiotics expressed in DID and significant correlations exist between use of broad-spectrum penicillins expressed in PID and RxIDs.

What is the most appropriate metric for the assessment of volume of antibiotic use?

One of the core elements of antibiotic stewardship is surveillance and monitoring of quantity of antibiotic use. This requires tools for measuring the quantity of antibiotic use. However, these metrics have not been standardized, and different metrics are used across different countries, regions and individual healthcare settings. In the literature, there is much controversy on the most appropriate metric for monitoring antibiotic use. Several authors have questioned the relevance of DDDs, which are recommended by the WHO, while others still prefer using DDDs as the best available metric. The results of the recent DRIVE-AB project suggest that a combination of metrics may be the best approach, since all metrics have limitations and provide different perspectives.

Patterns of dental antibiotic prescribing in 2017: Australia, England, United States, and British Columbia (Canada)

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to compare patterns of dental antibiotic prescribing in Australia, England, and North America (United States and British Columbia, Canada).

DESIGN

Population-level analysis of antibiotic prescription.

SETTING

Outpatient prescribing by dentists in 2017.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients receiving an antibiotic dispensed by an outpatient pharmacy.

METHODS

Prescription-based rates adjusted by population were compared overall and by antibiotic class. Contingency tables assessed differences in the proportion of antibiotic class by country.

RESULTS

In 2017, dentists in the United States had the highest antibiotic prescribing rate per 1,000 population and Australia had the lowest rate. The penicillin class, particularly amoxicillin, was the most frequently prescribed for all countries. The second most common agents prescribed were clindamycin in the United States and British Columbia (Canada) and metronidazole in Australia and England. Broad-spectrum agents, amoxicillin-clavulanic acid, and azithromycin were the highest in Australia and the United States, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Extreme differences exist in antibiotics prescribed by dentists in Australia, England, the United States, and British Columbia. The United States had twice the antibiotic prescription rate of Australia and the most frequently prescribed antibiotic in the US was clindamycin. Significant opportunities exist for the global dental community to update their prescribing behavior relating to second-line agents for penicillin allergic patients and to contribute to international efforts addressing antibiotic resistance. Patient safety improvements will result from optimizing dental antibiotic prescribing, especially for antibiotics associated with resistance (broad-spectrum agents) or C. difficile (clindamycin). Dental antibiotic stewardship programs are urgently needed worldwide.

Proxy indicators to estimate appropriateness of antibiotic prescriptions by general practitioners: a proof-of-concept cross-sectional study based on reimbursement data, north-eastern France 2017

Background

In most countries, including France, data on clinical indications for outpatient antibiotic prescriptions are not available, making it impossible to assess appropriateness of antibiotic use at prescription level.

Aim

Our objectives were to: (i) propose proxy indicators (PIs) to estimate appropriateness of antibiotic use at general practitioner (GP) level based on routine reimbursement data; and (ii) assess PIs’ performance scores and their clinimetric properties using a large regional reimbursement database.

Methods

A recent systematic literature review on quality indicators was the starting point for defining a set of PIs, taking French national guidelines into account. We performed a cross-sectional study analysing National Health Insurance data (available at prescriber and patient levels) on antibiotics prescribed by GPs in 2017 for individuals living in north-eastern France. We measured performance scores of the PIs and their case-mix stability, and tested their measurability, applicability, and room for improvement (clinimetric properties).

Results

The 3,087 GPs included in this study prescribed a total of 2,077,249 antibiotic treatments. We defined 10 PIs with specific numerators, denominators and targets. Performance was low for almost all indicators ranging from 9% to 75%, with values < 30% for eight of 10 indicators. For all PIs, we found large variation between GPs and patient populations (case-mix stability). Regarding clinimetric properties, all PIs were measurable, applicable, and showed high improvement potential.

Conclusions

The set of 10 PIs showed satisfactory clinimetric properties and might be used to estimate appropriateness of antibiotic prescribing in primary care, in an automated way within antibiotic stewardship programmes.

Structural Antibiotic Surveillance and Stewardship via Indication-Linked Quality Indicators: Pilot in Dutch Primary Care

Insight into antibiotic prescribing quality is key to general practitioners (GPs) to improve their prescribing behavior and to national antibiotic surveillance and stewardship programs. Additionally to numbers of prescribed antibiotics, quality indicators (QIs) linked to the clinical indication for prescribing are urgently needed. The aim of this proof of concept study was to define indication-linked QIs which can be easily implemented in Dutch primary care by collaborating with data-extraction/processing companies that routinely process patient data for GP practices. An expert group of academic and practicing GPs defined indication-linked QIs for which outcomes can be derived from routine care data. QI outcomes were calculated and fed back to GPs from 44 practices, associations between QI outcomes were determined, and GPs’ opinions and suggestions with respect to the new set were captured using an online questionnaire. The new set comprises: (1) total number of prescribed antibiotics per 1000 registered patients and percentages of generally non-1st choice antibiotics; (2) prescribing percentages for episodes of upper and lower respiratory tract infection; (3) 1st choice prescribing for episodes of tonsillitis, pneumonia and cystitis in women. Large inter-practice variation in QI outcomes was found. The validity of the QI outcomes was confirmed by associations that were expected. The new set was highly appreciated by GPs and additional QIs were suggested. We conclude that it proved feasible to provide GPs with informative, indication-linked feedback of their antibiotic prescribing quality by collaborating with established data extraction/processing companies. Based on GPs’ suggestions the set will be refined and extended and used in the near future as yearly feedback with benchmarking for GPs and for national surveillance and stewardship purposes.

Measuring Antibiotic Stewardship Programmes and Initiatives: An Umbrella Review in Primary Care Medicine and a Systematic Review of Dentistry

Antibiotic stewardship aims to tackle the global problem of drug-resistant infections by promoting the responsible use of antibiotics. Most antibiotics are prescribed in primary care and widespread overprescribing has been reported, including 80% in dentistry. This review aimed to identify outcomes measured in studies evaluating antibiotic stewardship across primary healthcare. An umbrella review was undertaken across medicine and a systematic review in dentistry. Systematic searches of Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase and Web of Science were undertaken. Two authors independently selected and quality assessed the included studies (using Critical Appraisal Skills Programme for the umbrella review and Quality Assessment Tool for Studies with Diverse Designs for the systematic review). Metrics used to evaluate antibiotic stewardship programmes and interventions were extracted and categorized. Comparisons between medical and dental settings were made. Searches identified 2355 medical and 2704 dental studies. After screening and quality assessment, ten and five studies, respectively, were included. Three outcomes were identified across both medical and dental studies: All focused on antibiotic usage. Four more outcomes were found only in medical studies: these measured patient outcomes, such as adverse effects. To evaluate antibiotic stewardship programmes and interventions across primary healthcare settings, measures of antibiotic use and patient outcomes are recommended.

Antimicrobial stewardship in dental practice

BACKGROUND

Antibiotic resistance is a global public health problem that is responsible for increased patient morbidity and mortality and financial burden. Dental antibiotic prescribing contributes to approximately 10% of all antibiotic prescriptions, and an estimated 80% of that prescribing is deemed inappropriate. Dental antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) has an important role to play in international efforts to tackle antibiotic resistance. The aim of the authors was to comment on the implementation of AMS strategies in outpatient dental practices.

METHODS

The authors included previous studies regarding outpatient antibiotic stewardship, longitudinal studies quantifying dispensed dental antibiotic prescription use, and interventional studies aimed at implementing AMS interventions in dentistry.

RESULTS

Researchers in several studies conducted trials regarding the use of various interventions, mostly comprising a combination of audit, feedback, dissemination of guidelines, and educational components to improve dental prescribing.

CONCLUSIONS AND PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

In regard to the establishment of an AMS strategy, aspects to be considered should include raising awareness about the risks of unnecessary use of antibiotics. Engaging and educating the entire dental team and patients, as well as collaborating with other specialized professionals, are important elements. Context-specific interventions with a methodical and measured approach are ideal.

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.

Pilot study of an online hospital antibiotic use tracking and reporting system

BACKGROUND

Antimicrobial use (AMU) varies widely among hospitals, suggesting a need to better monitor usage and evaluate the effectiveness of antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs). Our objective was to assess the feasibility of implementing an online voluntary hospital antibiotic use tracking and reporting system.

METHODS

An online survey was sent to ASP clinicians representing hospitals across Ontario. Hospitals that tracked total hospital-wide inpatient antibiotic use in 2017 were asked to submit either days of therapy (DOT) or defined daily doses (DDD), along with separate inpatient days (PD), which were used as the denominator. Respondents who indicated no hospital-wide AMU tracking were asked to describe the barriers to its use. Antibiotic use was displayed on a public website for consenting hospitals.

RESULTS

Of 201 eligible hospitals, 66 (33%) provided AMU data representing 10,634 of 25,208 (43%) eligible inpatient beds in the province. DOT and DDD data were provided by 36 hospitals, each. Weighted average antibiotic use was highest in acute teaching hospitals (513 DOT/1,000 PD, 709 DDD/1,000 PD) and lowest in complex continuing care and rehabilitation facilities (158 DOT/1,000 PD, 159 DDD/1,000 PD). Barriers cited for providing hospital-wide AMU data include lack of time and resources to collect and evaluate AMU data and technological limitations preventing data collection.

CONCLUSION

Integrating hospital AMU tracking and reporting as part of a voluntary initiative is feasible, with relatively broad participation. Short of a legislative mandate for participation, opportunities still exist to increase representation, including provision of guidance and technical support to help hospitals track and share AMU.

Nurse roles in antimicrobial stewardship: lessons from public sectors models of acute care service delivery in the United Kingdom

Background

Health care services must engage all relevant healthcare workers, including nurses, in optimal antimicrobial use to address the global threat of drug-resistant infections. Reflecting upon the variety of antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) nursing models already implemented in the UK could facilitate policymaking and decisions in other settings about context-sensitive, pragmatic nurse roles.

Methods

We describe purposefully selected cases drawn from the UK network of public sector nurses in AMS exploring their characteristics, influence, relations with clinical and financial structures, and role content.

Results

AMS nursing has been deployed in the UK within 'vertical', 'horizontal' or 'hybrid' models. The 'vertical' model refers to a novel, often unique consultant-type role ideally suited to transform organisational practice by legitimising nurse participation in antimicrobial decisions. Such organisational improvements may not be straightforward, though, due to scalability issues. The 'horizontal' model can foster coordinated efforts to increase optimal AMS behaviours in all nurses around a narrative of patient safety and quality. Such model may be unable to address tensions between the required institutional response to sepsis and the inappropriate use of antibiotics. Finally, the 'hybrid' model would increase AMS responsibilities for all nurses whilst allocating some expanded AMS skills to existing teams of specialists such as sepsis or vascular access nurses. This model can generate economies of scale, yet it may be threatened by a lack of clarity about a nurse-relevant vision.

Conclusions

A variety of models articulating the participation of nurses in antimicrobial stewardship efforts have already been implemented in public sector organisations in the UK. The strengths and weaknesses of each model need considering before implementation in other settings and healthcare systems, including precise metrics of success and careful consideration of context-sensitive, resource dependent and pragmatic solutions.

A governance framework for development and assessment of national action plans on antimicrobial resistance

Strengthening governance is an essential strategy to tackling antimicrobial resistance (AMR) at all levels: global, national, regional, and local. To date, no systematic approach to governance of national action plans on AMR exists. To address this issue, we aimed to develop the first governance framework to offer guidance for both the development and assessment of national action plans on AMR. We reviewed health system governance framework reviews to inform the basic structure of our framework, international guidance documents from WHO, the Food and Agriculture Organization, the World Organisation for Animal Health, and the European Commission, and sought the input of 25 experts from international organisations, government ministries, policy institutes, and academic institutions to develop and refine our framework. The framework consists of 18 domains with 52 indicators that are contained within three governance areas: policy design, implementation tools, and monitoring and evaluation. To consider the dynamic nature of AMR, the framework is conceptualised as a cyclical process, which is responsive to the context and allows for continuous improvement and adaptation of national action plans on AMR.

Successful Implementation of an Antibiotic Stewardship Program in an Academic Dental Practice

BACKGROUND

Most antibiotic use in the United States occurs in the outpatient setting, and 10% of these prescriptions are generated by dentists. The development of comprehensive antibiotic stewardship programs (ASPs) in the dental setting is nascent, and therefore we describe the implementation of a dental ASP.

METHODS

A collaborative team of dentist, pharmacist, and physician leaders conducted a baseline needs assessment and literature evaluation to identify opportunities to improve antibiotic prescribing by dentists within Illinois' largest oral health care provider for Medicaid recipients. A multimodal intervention was implemented that included patient and provider education, clinical guideline development, and an assessment of the antibiotic prescribing rate per urgent care visit before and after the educational interventions.

RESULTS

We identified multiple needs, including standardization of antibiotic prescribing practices for patients with acute oral infections in the urgent care clinics. A 72.9% decrease in antibiotic prescribing was observed in urgent care visits after implementation of our multimodal intervention (preintervention urgent care prescribing rate, 8.5% [24/283]; postintervention, 2.3% [8/352]; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

We report the successful implementation of a dental ASP that is concordant with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Core Elements of Antibiotic Stewardship in the Outpatient Setting. Our approach may be adapted to other dental practices to improve antibiotic prescribing.

Study protocol for a multicentre, cluster randomised, superiority trial evaluating the impact of computerised decision support, audit and feedback on antibiotic use: the COMPuterized Antibiotic Stewardship Study (COMPASS)

INTRODUCTION

Inappropriate use of antimicrobials in hospitals contributes to antimicrobial resistance. Antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) interventions aim to improve antimicrobial prescribing, but they are often resource and personnel intensive. Computerised decision supportsystems (CDSSs) seem a promising tool to improve antimicrobial prescribing but have been insufficiently studied in clinical trials.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The COMPuterized Antibiotic Stewardship Study trial, is a publicly funded, open-label, cluster randomised, controlled superiority trial which aims to determine whether a multimodal CDSS intervention integrated in the electronic health record (EHR) reduces overall antibiotic exposure in adult patients hospitalised in wards of two secondary and one tertiary care centre in Switzerland compared with 'standard-of-care' AMS. Twenty-four hospital wards will be randomised 1:1 to either intervention or control, using a 'pair-matching' approach based on baseline antibiotic use, specialty and centre. The intervention will consist of (1) decision support for the choice of antimicrobial treatment and duration of treatment for selected indications (based on indication entry), (2) accountable justification for deviation from the local guidelines (with regard to the choice of molecules and duration), (3) alerts for self-guided re-evaluation of treatment on calendar day 4 of antimicrobial therapy and (4) monthly ward-level feedback of antimicrobial prescribing indicators. The primary outcome will be the difference in overall systemic antibiotic use measured in days of therapy per admission based on administration data recorded in the EHR over the whole intervention period (12 months), taking into account clustering. Secondary outcomes include qualitative and quantitative antimicrobial use indicators, economic outcomes and clinical, microbiological and patient safety indicators.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval was obtained for all participating sites (Comission Cantonale d'Éthique de la Recherche (CCER)2017-00454). The results of the trial will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. Further dissemination activities will be presentations/posters at national and international conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03120975; Pre-results.

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.

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

Background

Conducted as part of the Driving Reinvestment in Research and Development and Responsible Antibiotic Use (DRIVE-AB) project, this study aimed to identify key elements for a global definition of responsible antibiotic use based on diverse stakeholder input.

Methods

A three-step RAND-modified Delphi method was applied. First, a systematic review of antibiotic stewardship literature and relevant organization web sites identified definitions and synonyms of responsible use. Identified elements of definitions were presented by questionnaire to a multidisciplinary international stakeholder panel for appraisal of their relevance. Finally, questionnaire results were discussed in a consensus meeting.

Results

The systematic review and the web site search identified 17 synonyms (e.g. appropriate, correct) and 22 potential elements to include in a definition of responsible use. Elements were grouped into patient-level (e.g. Indication, Documentation) or societal-level elements (e.g. Education, Future Effectiveness). Forty-eight stakeholders with diverse backgrounds [medical community, public health, patients, antibiotic research and development (R&D), regulators, governments] from 18 countries across all continents participated in the questionnaire. Based on relevance scores, 21 elements were retained, 9 were rephrased and 1 was added. Together, the 22 elements and associated best-practice descriptions comprise an exhaustive list of elements to be considered when defining responsible use.

Conclusions

Combination of concepts from the literature and stakeholder opinion led to an international multidisciplinary consensus on a global definition of responsible antibiotic use. The widely diverging perspectives of stakeholders providing input should ensure the comprehensiveness and relevance of the definition for both individual patients and society. An aspirational goal would be to address all elements.