Rodney James1, Lydia Upjohn2, Menino Cotta3, Susan Luu2, Caroline Marshall3, Kirsty Buising2, Karin Thursky2. 1. Department of Medicine, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria 3010, Australia Victorian Infectious Disease Service, Royal Melbourne Hospital at the Peter Doherty Institute for Infection and Immunity, Melbourne, Victoria 3010, Australia rod.james@mh.org.au. 2. Victorian Infectious Disease Service, Royal Melbourne Hospital at the Peter Doherty Institute for Infection and Immunity, Melbourne, Victoria 3010, Australia. 3. Department of Medicine, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria 3010, Australia Victorian Infectious Disease Service, Royal Melbourne Hospital at the Peter Doherty Institute for Infection and Immunity, Melbourne, Victoria 3010, Australia.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) programmes have been developed with the intention of reducing inappropriate and unnecessary use of antimicrobials, while improving the quality of patient care and locally helping prevent the development of antimicrobial resistance. An important aspect of AMS programmes is the qualitative assessment of prescribing through antimicrobial prescribing surveys (APS), which are able to provide information about the prescribing behaviour within institutions. Owing to lack of standardization of audit tools and the resources required, qualitative methods for the assessment of antimicrobial use are not often performed. The aim of this study was to design an audit tool that was appropriate for use in all Australian hospitals, suited to local user requirements and included an assessment of the overall appropriateness of the prescription. METHODS: In November 2011, a pilot APS was conducted across 32 hospitals to assess the usability and generalizability of a newly designed audit tool. Following participant feedback, this tool was revised to reflect the requirements of the respondents. A second pilot study was then performed in November 2012 across 85 hospitals. RESULTS: These surveys identified several areas that can be targets for quality improvement at a national level, including: documentation of indication; surgical prophylaxis prescribed for >24 h; compliance with prescribing guidelines; and the appropriateness of the prescription. CONCLUSIONS: By involving the end users in the design and evaluation, we have been able to provide a practical and relevant APS tool for quantitative and qualitative data collection in a wide range of Australian hospital settings.
OBJECTIVES: Antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) programmes have been developed with the intention of reducing inappropriate and unnecessary use of antimicrobials, while improving the quality of patient care and locally helping prevent the development of antimicrobial resistance. An important aspect of AMS programmes is the qualitative assessment of prescribing through antimicrobial prescribing surveys (APS), which are able to provide information about the prescribing behaviour within institutions. Owing to lack of standardization of audit tools and the resources required, qualitative methods for the assessment of antimicrobial use are not often performed. The aim of this study was to design an audit tool that was appropriate for use in all Australian hospitals, suited to local user requirements and included an assessment of the overall appropriateness of the prescription. METHODS: In November 2011, a pilot APS was conducted across 32 hospitals to assess the usability and generalizability of a newly designed audit tool. Following participant feedback, this tool was revised to reflect the requirements of the respondents. A second pilot study was then performed in November 2012 across 85 hospitals. RESULTS: These surveys identified several areas that can be targets for quality improvement at a national level, including: documentation of indication; surgical prophylaxis prescribed for >24 h; compliance with prescribing guidelines; and the appropriateness of the prescription. CONCLUSIONS: By involving the end users in the design and evaluation, we have been able to provide a practical and relevant APS tool for quantitative and qualitative data collection in a wide range of Australian hospital settings.
Authors: Jason A Trubiano; M Lindsay Grayson; Elizabeth J Phillips; Andrew J Stewardson; Karin A Thursky; Monica A Slavin Journal: J Antimicrob Chemother Date: 2018-11-01 Impact factor: 5.790
Authors: Jacqueline T Bork; Kimberly C Claeys; Emily L Heil; Mary Banoub; Surbhi Leekha; John D Sorkin; Michael Kleinberg Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2020-07-22 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: Jason A Trubiano; Karin A Thursky; Andrew J Stewardson; Karen Urbancic; Leon J Worth; Cheryl Jackson; Wendy Stevenson; Michael Sutherland; Monica A Slavin; M Lindsay Grayson; Elizabeth J Phillips Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2017-07-01 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Annelie A Monnier; Barry I Eisenstein; Marlies E Hulscher; Inge C Gyssens Journal: J Antimicrob Chemother Date: 2018-06-01 Impact factor: 5.790
Authors: Inger van Heijl; Valentijn A Schweitzer; Lufang Zhang; Paul D van der Linden; Cornelis H van Werkhoven; Douwe F Postma Journal: Drugs Aging Date: 2018-05 Impact factor: 3.923
Authors: N Deborah Friedman; Seok M Lim; Rodney James; Robyn Ingram; Mary O'Reilly; James G D Pollard; Sonia Koning; Catherine George; Arjun Rajkhowa; Douglas F Johnson; Kirsty L Buising Journal: JAC Antimicrob Resist Date: 2020-08-06
Authors: Karin Thursky; Senthil Lingaratnam; Jasveer Jayarajan; Gabrielle M Haeusler; Benjamin Teh; Michelle Tew; Georgina Venn; Alison Hiong; Christine Brown; Vivian Leung; Leon J Worth; Kim Dalziel; Monica A Slavin Journal: BMJ Open Qual Date: 2018-07-06