Abstract

BackgroundThe optimal way for antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) to interact with existing infectious disease physician (IDP) services within the same institution is unknown. In our institution, IDPs and our prospective audit and feedback ASP operate independently, with occasionally differing recommendations offered for the same inpatient. We performed a retrospective audit on inpatients that had been reviewed by both IDPs and ASP within a 7-day period, focusing on cases where different therapy-modifying recommendations had been offered. We analyzed the outcomes in inpatients where the ASP recommendations were accepted and compared these with the inpatients where the IDP recommendations were accepted instead. Outcomes assessed were 30-day mortality post-ASP review, unplanned re-admission within 30 days post-discharge from hospital, and clinical deterioration at 7 days post-ASP review.FindingsThere were 143 (18.9%) patients where differing recommendations had been offered, with primary physicians accepting 69.9% of ASP recommendations. No significant differences in terms of demographics, clinical characteristics, 30-day mortality, and re-admission rates were observed, although clinical deterioration rates were lower in patients where the ASP recommendation was accepted (8.0% vs. 27.9%; p = 0.002). On multivariate analysis, hematology-oncology inpatients were associated with unplanned readmission. Increasing age and hematology-oncology inpatients were associated with clinical deterioration 7 days post-recommendation, whereas acceptance of ASP recommendations was protective. No characteristic was independently associated with 30-day mortality.ConclusionIn conclusion, independent reviews by both IDPs and ASPs can be compatible within large tertiary hospitals, providing primary physicians even in situations of conflicting recommendations viable alternative antimicrobial prescribing advice.

Highlights

  • The optimal way for antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) to interact with existing infectious disease physician (IDP) services within the same institution is unknown

  • In conclusion, independent reviews by both IDPs and ASPs can be compatible within large tertiary hospitals, providing primary physicians even in situations of conflicting recommendations viable alternative antimicrobial prescribing advice

  • There were 756 patients within the audit period that had concurrently been reviewed by both Infectious diseases (ID) physicians and the ASP, of which 143 (18.9%) had differing therapymodifying recommendations

Read more

Summary

Conclusion

Independent reviews by both IDPs and ASPs can be compatible within large tertiary hospitals, providing primary physicians even in situations of conflicting recommendations viable alternative antimicrobial prescribing advice.

Introduction
Results
Discussion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call