Shiona K Glass-Kaastra1, Rita Finley1, Jim Hutchinson2, David M Patrick3, Karl Weiss4, John Conly5. 1. Public Health Agency of Canada, Centre for Food-borne, Environmental and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, Guelph, Ontario; 2. Division of Medical Microbiology, Island Medical Program, University of British Columbia; 3. British Columbia Centre for Disease Control, Vancouver, British Columbia; ; University of British Columbia, School of Population and Public Health, Vancouver, British Columbia; 4. University of Montreal, Department of Infectious Diseases and Microbiology, Hôpital Maisonneuve-Rosemont, Montreal, Quebec; 5. Department of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta ; Department of Microbiology, Immunology and Infectious Diseases, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta ; Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Because antimicrobial use is commonly associated with the development of antimicrobial resistance, monitoring the volume and patterns of use of these agents is important. OBJECTIVE: To assess the use of quinolone antimicrobials within Canadian provinces over time. METHODS: ANTIMICROBIAL PRESCRIBING DATA COLLECTED BY IMS HEALTH CANADA WERE ACQUIRED FROM THE CANADIAN INTEGRATED PROGRAM FOR ANTIMICROBIAL RESISTANCE SURVEILLANCE AND THE CANADIAN COMMITTEE FOR ANTIMICROBIAL RESISTANCE, AND WERE USED TO CALCULATE TWO YEARLY METRICS: prescriptions per 1000 inhabitant-days and the mean defined daily doses (DDDs) per prescription. These measures were used to produce linear mixed models to assess differences among provinces and over time, while accounting for repeated measurements. RESULTS: The quinolone class of antimicrobials is used similarly among Canadian provinces. Year-to-year increases in quinolone prescribing occurred from 1995 to 2010, with a levelling off in the latter years. Year-to-year decreases in the DDDs per prescription were found to be significant from 2000 to 2010. DISCUSSION: Although the overall use of antimicrobials differs significantly among Canadian provinces, the use of the quinolone class does not vary at the provincial level. Results suggest that prescribing of ciprofloxacin may be a potential target for antimicrobial stewardship programs; however, decreases in the average DDDs per prescription suggest continued uptake of appropriate treatment guidelines.
INTRODUCTION: Because antimicrobial use is commonly associated with the development of antimicrobial resistance, monitoring the volume and patterns of use of these agents is important. OBJECTIVE: To assess the use of quinolone antimicrobials within Canadian provinces over time. METHODS: ANTIMICROBIAL PRESCRIBING DATA COLLECTED BY IMS HEALTH CANADA WERE ACQUIRED FROM THE CANADIAN INTEGRATED PROGRAM FOR ANTIMICROBIAL RESISTANCE SURVEILLANCE AND THE CANADIAN COMMITTEE FOR ANTIMICROBIAL RESISTANCE, AND WERE USED TO CALCULATE TWO YEARLY METRICS: prescriptions per 1000 inhabitant-days and the mean defined daily doses (DDDs) per prescription. These measures were used to produce linear mixed models to assess differences among provinces and over time, while accounting for repeated measurements. RESULTS: The quinolone class of antimicrobials is used similarly among Canadian provinces. Year-to-year increases in quinolone prescribing occurred from 1995 to 2010, with a levelling off in the latter years. Year-to-year decreases in the DDDs per prescription were found to be significant from 2000 to 2010. DISCUSSION: Although the overall use of antimicrobials differs significantly among Canadian provinces, the use of the quinolone class does not vary at the provincial level. Results suggest that prescribing of ciprofloxacin may be a potential target for antimicrobial stewardship programs; however, decreases in the average DDDs per prescription suggest continued uptake of appropriate treatment guidelines.
Entities:
Keywords:
Antimicrobial use; Drug utilization; Quinolones; Surveillance
Authors: Lindsay Nicolle; Peter A M Anderson; John Conly; Thomas C Mainprize; Jamie Meuser; J Curtis Nickel; Vyta M Senikas; George G Zhanel Journal: Can Fam Physician Date: 2006-05 Impact factor: 3.275
Authors: Deborah Marshall; Jacqueline Gough; Paul Grootendorst; Melanie Buitendyk; Barbara Jaszewski; Susan Simonyi; Farah Jivraj; Stuart Macleod Journal: J Health Serv Res Policy Date: 2006-01
Authors: James A Karlowsky; Philippe R S Lagacé-Wiens; Patricia J Simner; Melanie R DeCorby; Heather J Adam; Andrew Walkty; Daryl J Hoban; George G Zhanel Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2011-05-02 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: Conan MacDougall; J Patrick Powell; Christopher K Johnson; Michael B Edmond; Ronald E Polk Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2005-06-28 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Marcus J Zervos; Ellie Hershberger; David P Nicolau; David J Ritchie; Lori K Blackner; Elizabeth A Coyle; Andrew J Donnelly; Stephen F Eckel; Robert H K Eng; Alexandra Hiltz; Arpi G Kuyumjian; William Krebs; Angee McDaniel; Patricia Hogan; Teresa J Lubowski Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2003-11-20 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Geoffrey Taylor; Denise Gravel; Lynora Saxinger; Kathryn Bush; Kimberley Simmonds; Anne Matlow; Joanne Embree; Nicole Le Saux; Lynn Johnston; Kathryn N Suh; John Embil; Elizabeth Henderson; Michael John; Virginia Roth; Alice Wong Journal: Can J Infect Dis Med Microbiol Date: 2015 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 2.471