Use of leading practices in US hospital antimicrobial stewardship programs

10Citations
Citations of this article
19Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Objective: To determine the proportion of hospitals that implemented 6 leading practices in their antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs). Design: Cross-sectional observational survey. Setting: Acute-care hospitals. Participants: ASP leaders. Methods: Advance letters and electronic questionnaires were initiated February 2020. Primary outcomes were percentage of hospitals that (1) implemented facility-specific treatment guidelines (FSTG); (2) performed interactive prospective audit and feedback (PAF) either face-to-face or by telephone; (3) optimized diagnostic testing; (4) measured antibiotic utilization; (5) measured C. difficile infection (CDI); and (6) measured adherence to FSTGs. Results: Of 948 hospitals invited, 288 (30.4%) completed the questionnaire. Among them, 82 (28.5%) had <99 beds, 162 (56.3%) had 100-399 beds, and 44 (15.2%) had ≥400+ beds. Also, 230 (79.9%) were healthcare system members. Moreover, 161 hospitals (54.8%) reported implementing FSTGs; 214 (72.4%) performed interactive PAF; 105 (34.9%) implemented procedures to optimize diagnostic testing; 235 (79.8%) measured antibiotic utilization; 258 (88.2%) measured CDI; and 110 (37.1%) measured FSTG adherence. Small hospitals performed less interactive PAF (61.0%; P =.0018). Small and nonsystem hospitals were less likely to optimize diagnostic testing: 25.2% (P =.030) and 21.0% (P =.0077), respectively. Small hospitals were less likely to measure antibiotic utilization (67.8%; P =.0010) and CDI (80.3%; P =.0038). Nonsystem hospitals were less likely to implement FSTGs (34.3%; P

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Stenehjem, E. A., Braun, B. I., Chitavi, S. O., Hyun, D. Y., Schmaltz, S. P., Fakih, M. G., … Baker, D. W. (2023). Use of leading practices in US hospital antimicrobial stewardship programs. Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology, 44(6), 861–868. https://doi.org/10.1017/ice.2022.241

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free