| Literature DB >> 34941631 |
Yuman Yumi Lee1, Nicole Bradley1.
Abstract
Antibiotic resistance is a major public health threat. Patient education on the appropriate use of antibiotics is a key component in combating antimicrobial resistance. The purpose of this study was to analyze the utility of an origami fortune teller as a novel peer educational tool in promoting antimicrobial stewardship on a university campus. An origami fortune teller, with various case scenarios to demonstrate key antibiotic principles, was developed and used by peer educators to educate students attending a university wellness fair. The case studies included: antibiotic indications; differentiation between viral vs. bacterial infection; proper use of antibiotics; non-pharmacologic measures to combat infection; and antibiotic resistance. Students were asked to take an assessment pre and post working with the tool. One hundred and forty-three students received education using the novel tool. A significant improvement in the assessment score was observed after education was completed using the novel tool (69.5 vs. 96.6 p ≤ 0.05).Entities:
Keywords: antimicrobial stewardship; peer education tool; university campus
Year: 2021 PMID: 34941631 PMCID: PMC8703290 DOI: 10.3390/pharmacy9040199
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Pharmacy (Basel) ISSN: 2226-4787
Figure 1Origami fortune teller educational tool.
Pre and Post Assessment Items.
| Item 1: Antibiotics can help with viral infections like the cold or the flu. |
Correct responses to assessment.
| Pre-Assessment ( | Post-Assessment ( | Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test | |
|---|---|---|---|
| All Students (N = 143) | |||
| Item 1 | 58 (40.3) | 132 (91.7) | Z = −7.28, |
| Item 2 | 60 (41.7) | 136 (94.4) | Z = −2.80, |
| Item 3 | 127 (88.2) | 140 (97.2) | Z = −2.95, |
| Item 4 | 127 (88.2) | 142 (98.6) | Z = −3.20, |
| Item 5 | 125 (86.8) | 141 (97.9) | Z = −3.31, |
| Mean overall score (%) | 69.5 | 96.6 | Z = −8.85, |
| CPHS Students (N = 61) | |||
| Item 1 | 30 (49.1) | 58 (95.1) | Z = −4.32, |
| Item 2 | 31 (50.8) | 60 (98.4) | Z = −4.54, |
| Item 3 | 57 (93.4) | 61 (100) | -- |
| Item 4 | 55 (90.2) | 61 (100) | Z = −2.20, |
| Item 5 | 57 (94.3) | 61(100) | -- |
| Mean overall score (%) | 75.4 | 98.7 | Z = −5.59, |
| Non-CPHS Students (N = 82) | |||
| Item 1 | 28 (34.1) | 74 (90.2) | Z = −5.91, |
| Item 2 | 29 (35.4) | 76 (92.7) | Z = −5.84, |
| Item 3 | 70 (85.4) | 79 (96.3) | Z = −2.40, |
| Item 4 | 72 (87.8) | 81 (98.8) | Z = −2.40, |
| Item 5 | 68 (82.9) | 80 (97.6) | Z = −2.82, |
| Mean overall score (%) | 65.1 | 95.1 | Z = −6.89, |
Figure 2Change in correct responses pre- and post-assessment.