Nguyen Hoa Q, Tunney Michael M, Hughes Carmel M
School of Pharmacy, Medical Biology Centre, Queen's University Belfast, 97 Lisburn Road, Belfast, BT9 7BL, Northern Ireland, UK.
Drugs Aging. 2019 Apr;36(4):355-369. doi: 10.1007/s40266-019-00637-0.
Inappropriate antimicrobial prescribing has been reported in care homes. This may result in serious drug-related adverse events, Clostridium difficile colonization, and the development of antimicrobial resistance among care home residents. Interventions to improve antibiotic prescribing in nursing homes have been reported through clinical trials, but whether antifungal and antiviral prescribing and residential homes have been considered, or how outcomes were measured and reported in such interventions, remains unclear.
Our aims were to evaluate the effect of interventions to improve antimicrobial stewardship in care homes and to report the outcomes used in these trials.
We searched 11 electronic databases and five trial registries for studies published until 30 November 2018. Inclusion criteria for the review were randomized controlled trials, targeting care home residents and healthcare professionals, providing interventions to improve antimicrobial prescribing compared with usual care or other interventions. The Cochrane tools for assessing risk of bias were used for quality assessment. A narrative approach was taken because of heterogeneity across the studies.
Five studies met the inclusion criteria. The studies varied in terms of types of infection, key targets, delivery of interventions, and reported outcomes. In total, 27 outcomes were reported across the studies, with seven not prespecified in the methods. The interventions had little impact on adherence to guidelines and prevalence of antimicrobial prescribing; they appeared to decrease total antimicrobial consumption but were unlikely to have affected overall hospital admissions and mortality. The overall quality of evidence was low because the risk of bias was high across the studies.
The interventions had limited effect on improving antimicrobial prescribing but did not appear to cause harm to care home residents. The low quality of evidence and heterogeneity in outcome measurement suggest the need for future well-designed studies and the development of a core outcome set to best evaluate the effectiveness of antimicrobial stewardship in care homes.
据报道,疗养院中存在抗菌药物处方不当的情况。这可能会导致严重的药物相关不良事件、艰难梭菌定植以及疗养院居民中抗菌药物耐药性的产生。通过临床试验已报道了改善养老院抗生素处方的干预措施,但对于抗真菌和抗病毒药物的处方以及疗养院是否被纳入考虑,或者在这些干预措施中如何衡量和报告结果,仍不明确。
我们的目的是评估改善疗养院抗菌药物管理干预措施的效果,并报告这些试验中使用的结果。
我们检索了11个电子数据库和5个试验注册库,以查找截至2018年11月30日发表的研究。该综述的纳入标准为随机对照试验,针对疗养院居民和医护人员,与常规护理或其他干预措施相比,提供改善抗菌药物处方的干预措施。使用Cochrane偏倚风险评估工具进行质量评估。由于各研究之间存在异质性,因此采用叙述性方法。
五项研究符合纳入标准。这些研究在感染类型、关键目标、干预措施的实施以及报告的结果方面各不相同。各研究共报告了27项结果,其中7项在方法中未预先设定。这些干预措施对指南依从性和抗菌药物处方率影响不大;它们似乎降低了抗菌药物的总消耗量,但不太可能影响总体住院率和死亡率。由于各研究的偏倚风险较高,证据的总体质量较低。
这些干预措施在改善抗菌药物处方方面效果有限,但似乎并未对疗养院居民造成伤害。证据质量低和结果测量的异质性表明,未来需要设计良好的研究,并制定核心结局集,以最佳评估疗养院抗菌药物管理的有效性。