Journal of pediatric surgery · 2023
A Process Improvement Project to Increase Compliance With Cephalosporin-based Surgical Antimicrobial Prophylaxis in Children With Non-severe Penicillin Allergies.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
He Katherine, Dawson Michele, Stroh Crystal, Taylor Kristina M, Quigley Susan, Jones Sarah, Cramm Shannon L, Rangel Shawn J
Аннотация
BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: Cephalosporins are considered safe and first-line prophylaxis in children with non-severe penicillin allergies. However, use of second-line agents is common and is primarily driven by poor allergic response documentation and misunderstanding of cross-reactivity risk. The goal of this project was to improve compliance with cephalosporin prophylaxis through improved documentation and targeted educational efforts.
METHODS: A multidisciplinary working group including representatives from allergy, surgery, infectious disease, and pharmacy developed staged interventions to facilitate compliance with cephalosporin prophylaxis. These included: (1) caregiver outreach to clarify incomplete allergy documentation, (2) a decision-support algorithm for prophylaxis use in penicillin-allergic patients, (3) standardized educational resources for surgical faculty and rotating trainees, (4) email reminders with prophylaxis recommendations sent out prior to scheduled cases, and (5) EMR-based decision support during antibiotic ordering. Rates of complete allergy documentation and cephalosporin utilization were compared for general surgery procedures between a 12-month pre-intervention and 14-month post-intervention period.
RESULTS: 578 patients with penicillin allergies recorded in the EMR were included (301 pre-intervention and 277 post-intervention), 54.0% of which received prophylaxis. Compared to the pre-intervention period, complete documentation of allergic reactions increased from 57.1% to 84.2% (p < 0.001) following implementation of all interventions. Appropriate prophylaxis utilization increased from 34.5% to 88.5% following implementation of all interventions (p < 0.001), and evidence of a stepwise increase in appropriate utilization was evident with each intervention stage. Persistent compliance failures during the post-implementation period were most commonly associated with urgent and emergent add-on cases. No adverse events or allergic responses were reported before or after project implementation.
CONCLUSIONS: Compliance with cephalosporin prophylaxis significantly improved following a multidisciplinary effort targeting education, allergy documentation, and clinical support at the point of care. Ongoing efforts include postoperative audits within 24 h for noncompliant cases in order to identify barriers and improve compliance for urgent and emergent add-on cases.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
TYPE OF STUDY: Prospective.
METHODS: A multidisciplinary working group including representatives from allergy, surgery, infectious disease, and pharmacy developed staged interventions to facilitate compliance with cephalosporin prophylaxis. These included: (1) caregiver outreach to clarify incomplete allergy documentation, (2) a decision-support algorithm for prophylaxis use in penicillin-allergic patients, (3) standardized educational resources for surgical faculty and rotating trainees, (4) email reminders with prophylaxis recommendations sent out prior to scheduled cases, and (5) EMR-based decision support during antibiotic ordering. Rates of complete allergy documentation and cephalosporin utilization were compared for general surgery procedures between a 12-month pre-intervention and 14-month post-intervention period.
RESULTS: 578 patients with penicillin allergies recorded in the EMR were included (301 pre-intervention and 277 post-intervention), 54.0% of which received prophylaxis. Compared to the pre-intervention period, complete documentation of allergic reactions increased from 57.1% to 84.2% (p < 0.001) following implementation of all interventions. Appropriate prophylaxis utilization increased from 34.5% to 88.5% following implementation of all interventions (p < 0.001), and evidence of a stepwise increase in appropriate utilization was evident with each intervention stage. Persistent compliance failures during the post-implementation period were most commonly associated with urgent and emergent add-on cases. No adverse events or allergic responses were reported before or after project implementation.
CONCLUSIONS: Compliance with cephalosporin prophylaxis significantly improved following a multidisciplinary effort targeting education, allergy documentation, and clinical support at the point of care. Ongoing efforts include postoperative audits within 24 h for noncompliant cases in order to identify barriers and improve compliance for urgent and emergent add-on cases.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
TYPE OF STUDY: Prospective.