PURPOSE: To report initial results from a European ICU surveillance programme focussing on antibiotic consumption, microbial resistance and infection control. METHODS: Thirty-five ICUs participated during 2005. Microbial resistance, antibiotic consumption and infection control stewardship measures were entered locally into a web-application. Results were validated locally, aggregated by project leaders and fed back to support local audit and benchmarking. RESULTS: Median (range) antibiotic consumption was 1,254 (range 348-4,992) DDD per 1,000 occupied bed days. The proportion of MRSA was median 11.6% (range 0-100), for ESBL phenotype of E. coli and K. pneumoniae 3.9% (0-80) and 14.3% (0-77.8) respectively, and for carbapenem-resistant P. aeruginosa 22.5% (0-100). Screening on admission for alert pathogens was commonly omitted, and there was a lack of single rooms for isolation. CONCLUSIONS: The surveillance programme demonstrated wide variation in antibiotic consumption, microbial resistance and infection control measures. The programme may, by providing rapid access to aggregated results, promote local and regional audit and benchmarking of antibiotic use and infection control practices.
PURPOSE: To report initial results from a European ICU surveillance programme focussing on antibiotic consumption, microbial resistance and infection control. METHODS: Thirty-five ICUs participated during 2005. Microbial resistance, antibiotic consumption and infection control stewardship measures were entered locally into a web-application. Results were validated locally, aggregated by project leaders and fed back to support local audit and benchmarking. RESULTS: Median (range) antibiotic consumption was 1,254 (range 348-4,992) DDD per 1,000 occupied bed days. The proportion of MRSA was median 11.6% (range 0-100), for ESBL phenotype of E. coli and K. pneumoniae 3.9% (0-80) and 14.3% (0-77.8) respectively, and for carbapenem-resistant P. aeruginosa 22.5% (0-100). Screening on admission for alert pathogens was commonly omitted, and there was a lack of single rooms for isolation. CONCLUSIONS: The surveillance programme demonstrated wide variation in antibiotic consumption, microbial resistance and infection control measures. The programme may, by providing rapid access to aggregated results, promote local and regional audit and benchmarking of antibiotic use and infection control practices.
Authors: E Nulens; E Broex; A Ament; R H Deurenberg; E Smeets; J Scheres; F H van Tiel; B Gordts; E E Stobberingh Journal: J Hosp Infect Date: 2008-03-19 Impact factor: 3.926
Authors: C Peña; A Guzmán; C Suarez; M A Dominguez; F Tubau; M Pujol; F Gudiol; J Ariza Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2007-04-09 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: H Hanberger; L G Burman; O Cars; M Erlandsson; H Gill; L E Nilsson; D Nordlinder; S M Walther Journal: Acta Anaesthesiol Scand Date: 2007-08 Impact factor: 2.105
Authors: S Singh; Y Z Zhang; S Chalkley; K Ananthan; E Demertzi; M Beach; M Cohen; V Grover; C Chung; J Tatlock; N Soni; B Azadian Journal: Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis Date: 2015-07-05 Impact factor: 3.267
Authors: Mohamed O Ahmed; Peter D Clegg; Nicola J Williams; Keith E Baptiste; Malcolm Bennett Journal: Ann Clin Microbiol Antimicrob Date: 2010-04-07 Impact factor: 3.944
Authors: Massimo Antonelli; Elie Azoulay; Marc Bonten; Jean Chastre; Giuseppe Citerio; Giorgio Conti; Daniel De Backer; François Lemaire; Herwig Gerlach; Goran Hedenstierna; Michael Joannidis; Duncan Macrae; Jordi Mancebo; Salvatore M Maggiore; Alexandre Mebazaa; Jean-Charles Preiser; Jerôme Pugin; Jan Wernerman; Haibo Zhang Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2010-01-08 Impact factor: 17.440