The Journal of hospital infection · 2023
Appropriateness of acute-care antibiotic prescriptions for community-acquired infections and surgical antibiotic prophylaxis in England: analysis of 2016 national point prevalence survey data.
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.
Higgins H, Freeman R, Doble A, Hood G, Islam J, Gerver S, Henderson K L, Demirjian A, Hopkins S, Ashiru-Oredope D
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Estimates of inappropriate prescribing can highlight key target areas for antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) and inform national targets.
OBJECTIVES: To (1) define and (2) produce estimates of inappropriate antibiotic prescribing levels within acute hospital trusts in England.
METHODS: The 2016 national Healthcare-Associated Infections (HAI), Antimicrobial Use (AMU) and AMS point prevalence survey (PPS) was used to derive estimates of inappropriate prescribing, focusing on the four most reported community-acquired antibiotic indications (CAIs) in the PPS and surgical prophylaxis. Definitions of appropriate antibiotic therapy for each indication were developed through the compilation of national treatment guidelines. A Likert-scale system of appropriateness coding was validated and refined through a two-stage expert review process.
RESULTS: Antimicrobial usage prevalence data were collected for 25,741 individual antibiotic prescriptions, representing 17,884 patients and 213 hospitals in England. 30.4% of prescriptions for the four CAIs of interest were estimated to be inappropriate (2054 prescriptions). The highest percentage of inappropriate prescribing occurred in uncomplicated cystitis prescriptions (62.5%), followed by bronchitis (48%). For surgical prophylaxis, 30.8% of prescriptions were inappropriate in terms of dose number, and 21.3% in terms of excess prophylaxis duration.
CONCLUSIONS: The 2016 prevalence of inappropriate antibiotic prescribing in hospitals in England was approximated to be 30.4%; this establishes a baseline prevalence and provided indication of where AMS interventions should be prioritized. Our definitions appraised antibiotic choice, treatment duration and dose number (surgical prophylaxis only); however, they did not consider other aspects of appropriateness, such as combination therapy - this is an important area for future work.
OBJECTIVES: To (1) define and (2) produce estimates of inappropriate antibiotic prescribing levels within acute hospital trusts in England.
METHODS: The 2016 national Healthcare-Associated Infections (HAI), Antimicrobial Use (AMU) and AMS point prevalence survey (PPS) was used to derive estimates of inappropriate prescribing, focusing on the four most reported community-acquired antibiotic indications (CAIs) in the PPS and surgical prophylaxis. Definitions of appropriate antibiotic therapy for each indication were developed through the compilation of national treatment guidelines. A Likert-scale system of appropriateness coding was validated and refined through a two-stage expert review process.
RESULTS: Antimicrobial usage prevalence data were collected for 25,741 individual antibiotic prescriptions, representing 17,884 patients and 213 hospitals in England. 30.4% of prescriptions for the four CAIs of interest were estimated to be inappropriate (2054 prescriptions). The highest percentage of inappropriate prescribing occurred in uncomplicated cystitis prescriptions (62.5%), followed by bronchitis (48%). For surgical prophylaxis, 30.8% of prescriptions were inappropriate in terms of dose number, and 21.3% in terms of excess prophylaxis duration.
CONCLUSIONS: The 2016 prevalence of inappropriate antibiotic prescribing in hospitals in England was approximated to be 30.4%; this establishes a baseline prevalence and provided indication of where AMS interventions should be prioritized. Our definitions appraised antibiotic choice, treatment duration and dose number (surgical prophylaxis only); however, they did not consider other aspects of appropriateness, such as combination therapy - this is an important area for future work.