Division of Internal Medicine, University Hospital Basel, Switzerland.
Division of Internal Medicine, University Hospital Basel, Switzerland / Department of Internal Medicine, Cantonal Hospital of Olten, Switzerland.
Swiss Med Wkly. 2019 Oct 27;149:w20135. doi: 10.4414/smw.2019.20135. eCollection 2019 Oct 7.
Inappropriate use of antimicrobials is associated with the emergence of antimicrobial resistance and adverse events. Antimicrobial stewardship programmes may both optimise treatment of infections and reduce antimicrobial resistance but are implemented in only a minority of Swiss hospitals. In addition, data on prescribing patterns and quality are scarce. We conducted a repeated point prevalence survey to evaluate the quality of antimicrobial prescribing in a single tertiary care centre.
Antimicrobial use was audited twice (summer 2017 and winter 2018) among all patients admitted to the University Hospital Basel, Switzerland. Data were collected from the electronic health record. Appropriateness of antimicrobial use was evaluated according to previously published rules and local national guidelines.
We evaluated 1112 patients of whom 378 (34%) received 548 prescriptions in total (30% for prophylaxis). Penicillins with β-lactamase inhibitors were most commonly used (30%), followed by cotrimoxazole (12%) and ceftriaxone (7%). Intravenous administration was chosen in 56% of patients. Prior to antimicrobial therapy, blood cultures were collected in 69% of patients. Overall, 182 (33%) prescriptions were not appropriate; reasons included lack of indication (11%), incorrect dosing (7%), delay in intravenous to oral switch (9%) or non-adherence to local guidelines (15%). A minority of patients received antimicrobials despite documented allergies (2%). Almost 38% of empirical prescriptions were inappropriate, compared with only 19% of prophylactic and 20% of targeted prescriptions. Penicillins with β-lactamase inhibitors and cephalosporins were most commonly involved in inappropriate prescribing (>50%) followed by carbapenems (30%), narrow-spectrum penicillins (17%) and cotrimoxazole (6%), with oral administration being involved less frequently than intravenous administration (15 vs 37%). Infectious diseases consultation and presence of immunosuppression were associated with reduced odds (odds ratio [OR] 0.38, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.21–0.70 and OR 0.31, 95% CI 0.17–0.54, respectively) of inappropriate prescription in the per-patient multivariable analysis, whereas being admitted to a surgical or intensive care unit was associated with increased odds (OR 1.83 and 5.67) compared with a medical unit.
Almost one third of prescriptions were inappropriate in our tertiary care centre despite local guidelines and an on-demand infectious diseases consultation service. Our results underscore the need for expanding current antimicrobial stewardship efforts, including national initiatives such as stewardship and prescribing guidelines, repeated surveys and identification of areas for improvement including timely intravenous to oral switches in order to reduce the consequences of inappropriate prescribing and of multidrug resistant organisms.
抗生素的不恰当使用与抗生素耐药性和不良事件的出现有关。抗生素管理计划既能优化感染的治疗效果,又能降低抗生素耐药性,但在瑞士只有少数医院实施。此外,关于处方模式和质量的数据也很匮乏。我们进行了一项重复的点患病率调查,以评估一家三级保健中心的抗生素处方质量。
在瑞士巴塞尔大学医院,我们两次对所有入院患者(2017 年夏季和 2018 年冬季)进行了抗生素使用情况的审核。数据从电子健康记录中收集。根据以前公布的规则和当地国家指南评估抗生素使用的适宜性。
我们评估了 1112 名患者,其中 378 名(34%)患者共接受了 548 张处方(30%用于预防)。使用最广泛的是青霉素类加β-内酰胺酶抑制剂(30%),其次是复方磺胺甲噁唑(12%)和头孢曲松(7%)。56%的患者采用静脉给药。在开始抗生素治疗前,有 69%的患者采集了血培养。总体而言,182 张(33%)处方不合适;原因包括无指征(11%)、剂量不正确(7%)、延迟从静脉转为口服(9%)或不遵守当地指南(15%)。尽管有记录的过敏反应,但只有少数患者(2%)接受了抗生素治疗。几乎 38%的经验性处方不合适,而预防性和靶向性处方分别只有 19%和 20%不合适。涉及不适当处方的最常见药物是青霉素类加β-内酰胺酶抑制剂和头孢菌素(>50%),其次是碳青霉烯类(30%)、窄谱青霉素类(17%)和复方磺胺甲噁唑(6%),口服给药的频率低于静脉给药(15%比 37%)。感染病会诊和免疫抑制的存在与减少不合适处方的几率(每例患者的多变量分析中比值比 [OR] 0.38,95%置信区间 [CI] 0.21-0.70 和 OR 0.31,95%CI 0.17-0.54)相关,而入住外科或重症监护病房与增加几率(OR 1.83 和 5.67)相关,与内科病房相比。
尽管有当地的指南和按需感染病会诊服务,但我们的三级保健中心仍有近三分之一的处方不合适。我们的研究结果强调需要扩大当前的抗生素管理工作,包括国家举措,如管理和处方指南、重复调查以及确定需要改进的领域,包括及时从静脉转为口服,以减少不适当处方和多药耐药菌的后果。