Dik Jan-Willem H, Hendrix Ron, Poelman Randy, Niesters Hubert G, Postma Maarten J, Sinha Bhanu, Friedrich Alexander W
a Department of Medical Microbiology, University Medical Center Groningen , University of Groningen , Groningen , The Netherlands.
b Medical Microbiology , Certe Laboratory for Infectious Diseases , Groningen , The Netherlands.
Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther. 2016 Jun;14(6):569-75. doi: 10.1080/14787210.2016.1178064. Epub 2016 May 3.
Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs (ASPs) are being implemented worldwide to optimize antimicrobial therapy, and thereby improve patient safety and quality of care. Additionally, this should counteract resistance development. It is, however, vital that correct and timely diagnostics are performed in parallel, and that an institution runs a well-organized infection prevention program. Currently, there is no clear consensus on which interventions an ASP should comprise. Indeed this depends on the institution, the region, and the patient population that is served. Different interventions will lead to different effects. Therefore, adequate evaluations, both clinically and financially, are crucial. Here, we provide a general overview of, and perspective on different intervention strategies and methods to evaluate these ASP programs, covering before mentioned topics. This should lead to a more consistent approach in evaluating these programs, making it easier to compare different interventions and studies with each other and ultimately improve infection and patient management.
抗菌药物管理计划(ASPs)正在全球范围内实施,以优化抗菌治疗,从而提高患者安全性和医疗质量。此外,这应能对抗耐药性的发展。然而,与此同时进行正确及时的诊断以及机构开展组织完善的感染预防计划至关重要。目前,对于抗菌药物管理计划应包含哪些干预措施尚无明确共识。实际上,这取决于机构、地区以及所服务的患者群体。不同的干预措施会产生不同的效果。因此,进行充分的临床和财务评估至关重要。在此,我们对不同的干预策略以及评估这些抗菌药物管理计划的方法进行总体概述并给出观点,涵盖上述主题。这应能使评估这些计划的方法更加一致,便于相互比较不同的干预措施和研究,最终改善感染管理和患者管理。