Abstract
Objective: Audit and feedback is an antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) strategy, with the potential to also optimize antimicrobial use in non-audited patients. This study aimed to determine whether audit and feedback reduce antimicrobial use in both audited and non-audited patients.
Design: Before-after trial with a 1-year intervention period and 2.5-year historical cohort.
Setting: 750-bed community hospital in the Netherlands.
Patients: All patients admitted to the urology wards during the 3.5-year study period were observed. Patients were classified as using antimicrobials if any antimicrobial was used for therapeutic reasons. Patients using antimicrobials prophylactically were excluded from measurements.
Intervention: The AMS team provided audit and feedback on antimicrobial use for patients using antimicrobials for 2 days. Retrospectively, antimicrobial use and length of stay (LOS) were compared with the historical cohort.
Results: Audits modified antimicrobial treatment in 52.8% of the cases. De-escalating, stopping, and switching from intravenous to oral treatment accounted for 72% of these modifications. Compared to patients from the cohort, who also used antimicrobials for 2 days, antimicrobial use decreased from 14.21 DDD/patient (95% CI, 13.08–15.34) to 11.45 DDD/patient (95% CI, 8.26–14.64; P = .047) for audited patients. Furthermore, mean LOS decreased from 7.42 days (95% CI, 6.79–8.06) to 6.13 days (95% CI, 5.38–6.89; P = .031). However, looking at all patients admitted to the urology wards, the percentage of patients using antimicrobials and total antimicrobial use remained unchanged.
Conclusions: Audit and feedback reduce antimicrobial use and LOS, but only for audited patients. Positive effects are not automatically transferred to patients for whom no audits have been performed.
Design: Before-after trial with a 1-year intervention period and 2.5-year historical cohort.
Setting: 750-bed community hospital in the Netherlands.
Patients: All patients admitted to the urology wards during the 3.5-year study period were observed. Patients were classified as using antimicrobials if any antimicrobial was used for therapeutic reasons. Patients using antimicrobials prophylactically were excluded from measurements.
Intervention: The AMS team provided audit and feedback on antimicrobial use for patients using antimicrobials for 2 days. Retrospectively, antimicrobial use and length of stay (LOS) were compared with the historical cohort.
Results: Audits modified antimicrobial treatment in 52.8% of the cases. De-escalating, stopping, and switching from intravenous to oral treatment accounted for 72% of these modifications. Compared to patients from the cohort, who also used antimicrobials for 2 days, antimicrobial use decreased from 14.21 DDD/patient (95% CI, 13.08–15.34) to 11.45 DDD/patient (95% CI, 8.26–14.64; P = .047) for audited patients. Furthermore, mean LOS decreased from 7.42 days (95% CI, 6.79–8.06) to 6.13 days (95% CI, 5.38–6.89; P = .031). However, looking at all patients admitted to the urology wards, the percentage of patients using antimicrobials and total antimicrobial use remained unchanged.
Conclusions: Audit and feedback reduce antimicrobial use and LOS, but only for audited patients. Positive effects are not automatically transferred to patients for whom no audits have been performed.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Article number | e46 |
| Number of pages | 7 |
| Journal | Antimicrobial Stewardship and Healthcare Epidemiology |
| Volume | 4 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 16-Apr-2024 |