Changes in inpatient medicine prescribing during COVID-19 lockdown.

BACKGROUND: New Zealand went into lockdown March 2020 successfully eliminating the circulation of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) virus. During lockdown there were reduced rates of respiratory infections and hospital admission numbers were low. At the time, rumours of benefit and harm of medicines for COVID-19 were widespread in the lay and medical media. AIM: To describe changes in inpatient prescribing in an acute general medicine service during the New Zealand COVID-19 lockdown in 2020. METHODS: Rates of prescribing of medicines during the 33 days of lockdown were compared with a 33-day control period before lockdown. Prescriptions, patients and bed days were calculated from the hospital patient administration and electronic prescribing and administration systems. RESULTS: In the general medicine service, acute admissions were 20% lower during lockdown (from 1216 pre-lockdown to 974). There was a small decrease in the rate of prescriptions per patient (10.1 vs 10.4, P = 0.01) during lockdown, and the average length of stay was shorter (3.2 vs 3.6 days). Nebulised administration decreased by 75% (1.3% vs 5.3% of admissions) but unexpectedly there was no change in the prescribing rates of antibacterial medicines, e.g. amoxicillin (26% vs 26%). There were no changes in rates of prescribing of medicines being rumoured to potentially improve (e.g. hydroxychloroquine) or worsen (e.g. angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors) COVID-19 outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Acute medical admissions decreased 20% during lockdown for COVID-19, with a proportional decrease in prescriptions. Reduced rates of respiratory tract infections did not lead to decreased prescribing of antibacterial medicines. Rumour-based prescribing did not eventuate.

Antimicrobial stewardship in human healthcare in Aotearoa New Zealand: urgent call for national leadership and co-ordinated efforts to preserve antimicrobial effectiveness

Within 30 years, the global number of deaths from AMR-associated infections is predicted to increase from ~700,000 to ~10 million people annually, if we do not act now.1 The Aotearoa New Zealand (NZ) response to the current COVID-19 pandemic has been lauded internationally-found-ed in science, responsive to expert advice, implemented with clear leadership and communication, and subject to ongoing critical evaluation and improvement. AMR-associated infections and related care (eg, time off work or school to travel to hospital for treatment) will disproportionately impact the most socioeconomically disadvantaged among us, those living in rural or remote settings, and Maori and Pacific populations who shoulder a greater infection and AMR burden and have increased reliance on antimicrobial therapy.6'7 One of the biggest drivers for AMR is antimicrobial use, which is high in human health in NZ compared with many developed countries.8'9 Most of our antimicrobial use (95%) is in the community9 and up to 50% may be inappropriate.2 The NZ community antibacterial consumption rate increased 49% between 2006 and 2014;in 2013, it exceeded that of 22 out of 29 European countries.8 A subsequent modest 14% decrease occurred across 2015 to 2018, mainly due to reductions in under 5 year olds,10 which is pleasing as antimicrobial use in childhood may create reservoirs of resistant pathogens impacting communities cross-generationally. In 2013, the Health Quality and Safety Commission (HQSC) published a scoping report that offered insight into what was needed to progress AMS in NZ.14 Key recommendations were to establish: * National leadership and coordination of AMS activities * National antimicrobial prescribing guidelines * Quality improvement tools and measures In the near decade that has followed this report, none of these recommendations have been achieved. The NCAMS should provide access to (and support use of) quality improvement tools (eg, auditing systems for between facility benchmarking), develop initiatives to improve antimicrobial use (including those involving consumers), monitor performance against quality markers, and establish clinical care standards with the oversight of NAMSEG.