Livorsi Daniel J, Suda Katie J, Cunningham Goedken Cassie, Hockett Sherlock Stacey, Balkenende Erin, Chasco Emily E, Scherer Aaron M, Goto Michihiko, Perencevich Eli N, Goetz Matthew Bidwell, Reisinger Heather Schacht
Center for Access & Delivery Research and Evaluation (CADRE), Iowa City Veterans Affairs Health Care System, Iowa City, IA, USA.
Department of Internal Medicine, University of Iowa Carver College of Medicine, Iowa City, IA, USA.
J Antimicrob Chemother. 2021 Jul 15;76(8):2195-2203. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkab138.
The optimal method for implementing hospital-level restrictions for antibiotics that carry a high risk of Clostridioides difficile infection has not been identified. We aimed to explore barriers and facilitators to implementing restrictions for fluoroquinolones and third/fourth-generation cephalosporins.
This mixed-methods study across a purposeful sample of 15 acute-care, geographically dispersed Veterans Health Administration hospitals included electronic surveys and semi-structured interviews (September 2018 to May 2019). Surveys on stewardship strategies were administered at each hospital and summarized with descriptive statistics. Interviews were performed with 30 antibiotic stewardship programme (ASP) champions across all 15 sites and 19 additional stakeholders at a subset of 5 sites; transcripts were analysed using thematic content analysis.
The most restricted agent was moxifloxacin, which was restricted at 12 (80%) sites. None of the 15 hospitals restricted ceftriaxone. Interviews identified differing opinions on the feasibility of restricting third/fourth-generation cephalosporins and fluoroquinolones. Some participants felt that restrictions could be implemented in a way that was not burdensome to clinicians and did not interfere with timely antibiotic administration. Others expressed concerns about restricting these agents, particularly through prior approval, given their frequent use, the difficulty of enforcing restrictions and potential unintended consequences of steering clinicians towards non-restricted antibiotics. A variety of stewardship strategies were perceived to be effective at reducing the use of these agents.
Across 15 hospitals, there were differing opinions on the feasibility of implementing antibiotic restrictions for third/fourth-generation cephalosporins and fluoroquinolones. While the perceived barrier to implementing restrictions was frequently high, many hospitals were effectively using restrictions and reported few barriers to their use.
尚未确定对具有艰难梭菌感染高风险的抗生素实施医院层面限制的最佳方法。我们旨在探讨对氟喹诺酮类和第三代/第四代头孢菌素实施限制的障碍和促进因素。
这项混合方法研究选取了15家急性护理、地理位置分散的退伍军人健康管理局医院作为有目的的样本,包括电子调查和半结构化访谈(2018年9月至2019年5月)。在每家医院进行了关于管理策略的调查,并用描述性统计进行总结。对所有15个地点的30名抗生素管理计划(ASP)倡导者以及5个地点子集的另外19名利益相关者进行了访谈;使用主题内容分析法对访谈记录进行了分析。
限制最严格的药物是莫西沙星,在12家(80%)医院受到限制。15家医院中没有一家限制头孢曲松。访谈发现,对于限制第三代/第四代头孢菌素和氟喹诺酮类药物的可行性存在不同意见。一些参与者认为,可以以不增加临床医生负担且不干扰及时使用抗生素的方式实施限制。另一些人则对限制这些药物表示担忧,特别是通过事先批准的方式,因为它们使用频繁,实施限制困难,而且可能会导致临床医生转向使用非限制抗生素产生意外后果。人们认为多种管理策略在减少这些药物的使用方面是有效的。
在15家医院中,对于对第三代/第四代头孢菌素和氟喹诺酮类药物实施抗生素限制的可行性存在不同意见。虽然实施限制的感知障碍通常较高,但许多医院有效地使用了限制措施,并且报告使用这些措施的障碍很少。