OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of postprescription review of broad-spectrum antimicrobial (study-ABX) agents on rates of antimicrobial use. DESIGN: Quasi-experimental before-after study. SETTING: Five academic medical centers. PATIENTS: Adults receiving at least 48 hours of study-ABX. METHODS: The baseline, intervention, and follow-up periods were 6 months each in 2 units at each of 5 sites. Adults receiving at least 48 hours of study-ABX entered the cohort as case-patients. During the intervention, infectious-diseases physicians reviewed the cases after 48 hours of study-ABX. The provider was contacted with alternative recommendations if antimicrobial use was considered to be unjustified on the basis of predetermined criteria. Acceptance rates were assessed 48 hours later. The primary outcome measure was days of study-ABX per 1,000 study-patient-days in the baseline and intervention periods. RESULTS: There were 1,265 patients in the baseline period and 1,163 patients in the intervention period. Study-ABX use decreased significantly during the intervention period at 2 sites: from 574.4 to 533.8 study-ABX days/1,000 patient-days (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 0.93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.88-0.97; P = .002) at hospital B and from 615.6 to 514.4 study-ABX days/1,000 patient-days (IRR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.79-0.88; P < .001) at hospital D. Both had established antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASP). Study-ABX use increased at 2 sites and stayed the same at 1 site. At all institutions combined, 390 of 1,429 (27.3%) study-ABX courses were assessed as unjustified; recommendations to modify or stop therapy were accepted for 260 (66.7%) of these courses. CONCLUSIONS: Postprescription review of study-ABX decreased antimicrobial utilization in some of the study hospitals and may be more effective when performed as part of an established ASP.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of postprescription review of broad-spectrum antimicrobial (study-ABX) agents on rates of antimicrobial use. DESIGN: Quasi-experimental before-after study. SETTING: Five academic medical centers. PATIENTS: Adults receiving at least 48 hours of study-ABX. METHODS: The baseline, intervention, and follow-up periods were 6 months each in 2 units at each of 5 sites. Adults receiving at least 48 hours of study-ABX entered the cohort as case-patients. During the intervention, infectious-diseases physicians reviewed the cases after 48 hours of study-ABX. The provider was contacted with alternative recommendations if antimicrobial use was considered to be unjustified on the basis of predetermined criteria. Acceptance rates were assessed 48 hours later. The primary outcome measure was days of study-ABX per 1,000 study-patient-days in the baseline and intervention periods. RESULTS: There were 1,265 patients in the baseline period and 1,163 patients in the intervention period. Study-ABX use decreased significantly during the intervention period at 2 sites: from 574.4 to 533.8 study-ABX days/1,000 patient-days (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 0.93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.88-0.97; P = .002) at hospital B and from 615.6 to 514.4 study-ABX days/1,000 patient-days (IRR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.79-0.88; P < .001) at hospital D. Both had established antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASP). Study-ABX use increased at 2 sites and stayed the same at 1 site. At all institutions combined, 390 of 1,429 (27.3%) study-ABX courses were assessed as unjustified; recommendations to modify or stop therapy were accepted for 260 (66.7%) of these courses. CONCLUSIONS: Postprescription review of study-ABX decreased antimicrobial utilization in some of the study hospitals and may be more effective when performed as part of an established ASP.
Authors: Pranita D Tamma; Edina Avdic; John F Keenan; Yuan Zhao; Gobind Anand; James Cooper; Rebecca Dezube; Steven Hsu; Sara E Cosgrove Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2017-03-01 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Tamar F Barlam; Sara E Cosgrove; Lilian M Abbo; Conan MacDougall; Audrey N Schuetz; Edward J Septimus; Arjun Srinivasan; Timothy H Dellit; Yngve T Falck-Ytter; Neil O Fishman; Cindy W Hamilton; Timothy C Jenkins; Pamela A Lipsett; Preeti N Malani; Larissa S May; Gregory J Moran; Melinda M Neuhauser; Jason G Newland; Christopher A Ohl; Matthew H Samore; Susan K Seo; Kavita K Trivedi Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2016-04-13 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Jimish M Mehta; Kevin Haynes; E Paul Wileyto; Jeffrey S Gerber; Daniel R Timko; Steven C Morgan; Shawn Binkley; Neil O Fishman; Ebbing Lautenbach; Theoklis Zaoutis Journal: Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol Date: 2014-07-23 Impact factor: 3.254
Authors: Daniel Livorsi; Amber Comer; Marianne S Matthias; Eli N Perencevich; Matthew J Bair Journal: Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol Date: 2015-06-16 Impact factor: 3.254
Authors: Scott R Evans; Daniel Rubin; Dean Follmann; Gene Pennello; W Charles Huskins; John H Powers; David Schoenfeld; Christy Chuang-Stein; Sara E Cosgrove; Vance G Fowler; Ebbing Lautenbach; Henry F Chambers Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2015-06-25 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Nasia Safdar; Vishala Parmasad; Roger Brown; Pascale Carayon; Alexander Lepak; John C O'Horo; Lucas Schulz Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2021-06-29 Impact factor: 2.692