Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds LS1 3EX, UK
CHU de Nancy, Service de Maladies Infectieuses, Nancy, France Université de Lorraine, Université Paris Descartes, EA 4360 Apemac, Nancy, France.
J Antimicrob Chemother. 2015 Apr;70(4):1245-55. doi: 10.1093/jac/dku497. Epub 2014 Dec 18.
To report the extent and components of global efforts in antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) in hospitals.
An Internet-based survey comprising 43 questions was disseminated worldwide in 2012.
Responses were received from 660 hospitals in 67 countries: Africa, 44; Asia, 50; Europe, 361; North America, 72; Oceania, 30; and South and Central America, 103. National AMS standards existed in 52% of countries, 4% were planning them and 58% had an AMS programme. The main barriers to implementing AMS programmes were perceived to be a lack of funding or personnel, a lack of information technology and prescriber opposition. In hospitals with an existing AMS programme, AMS rounds existed in 64%; 81% restricted antimicrobials (carbapenems, 74.3%; quinolones, 64%; and cephalosporins, 58%); and 85% reported antimicrobial usage, with 55% linking data to resistance rates and 49% linking data to infection rates. Only 20% had electronic prescribing for all patients. A total of 89% of programmes educated their medical, nursing and pharmacy staff on AMS. Of the hospitals, 38% had formally reviewed their AMS programme: reductions were reported by 96% of hospitals for inappropriate prescribing, 86% for broad-spectrum antibiotic use, 80% for expenditure, 71% for healthcare-acquired infections, 65% for length of stay or mortality and 58% for bacterial resistance.
The worldwide development and implementation of AMS programmes varies considerably. Our results should inform and encourage the further evaluation of this with a view to promoting a worldwide stewardship framework. The prospective measurement of well-defined outcomes of the impact of these programmes remains a significant challenge.
报告全球医院开展抗菌药物管理(AMS)工作的范围和组成部分。
2012 年,我们在全球范围内开展了一项基于互联网的调查,其中包含 43 个问题。
共收到来自 67 个国家 660 家医院的回复:非洲 44 家,亚洲 50 家,欧洲 361 家,北美洲 72 家,大洋洲 30 家,南美洲和中美洲 103 家。52%的国家制定了国家 AMS 标准,4%的国家正在制定标准,58%的国家开展了 AMS 项目。实施 AMS 项目的主要障碍被认为是缺乏资金或人员、缺乏信息技术以及处方医生的反对。在已开展 AMS 项目的医院中,AMS 查房占 64%;81%的医院限制使用抗菌药物(碳青霉烯类,74.3%;喹诺酮类,64%;头孢菌素类,58%);85%的医院报告了抗菌药物使用情况,其中 55%将数据与耐药率相关联,49%将数据与感染率相关联。仅有 20%的医院对所有患者实行电子处方。共有 89%的项目对医务人员、护士和药剂师进行了 AMS 教育。在这些医院中,38%的医院对 AMS 项目进行了正式审查:96%的医院报告了不适当的处方减少,86%的医院报告了广谱抗生素使用减少,80%的医院报告了支出减少,71%的医院报告了医院获得性感染减少,65%的医院报告了住院时间或死亡率减少,58%的医院报告了细菌耐药性减少。
全球范围内 AMS 项目的发展和实施差异很大。我们的研究结果应提供信息并鼓励进一步评估,以促进全球管理框架的建立。前瞻性地衡量这些项目对明确定义的结果的影响仍然是一个重大挑战。