Effect of an antimicrobial stewardship programme on antimicrobial utilisation and costs in patients with leukaemia: a retrospective controlled study.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the effectiveness of an antimicrobial stewardship programme on utilization and cost of antimicrobials in leukaemia patients in Canada. METHODS: We conducted a multisite retrospective observational time series study from 2005 to 2013. We implemented academic detailing as the intervention of an antimicrobial stewardship programme in leukaemia units at a hospital, piloted February-July 2010, then fully implemented December 2010-March 2013, with no intervention in August-November 2010. Internal control was the same hospital's allogeneic haematopoietic stem-cell transplantation unit. External control was the combined leukaemia-haematopoietic stem-cell transplantation unit at another hospital. Primary outcome was antimicrobial utilization (antibiotics and antifungals) in defined daily dose per 100 patient-days (PD). Secondary outcomes were antimicrobial cost (Canadian dollars per PD); cost and utilization by drug class; length of stay; 30-day inpatient mortality; and nosocomial Clostridium difficile infection. We used autoregressive integrated moving average models to evaluate the impact of the intervention on outcomes. RESULTS: The intervention group included 1006 patients before implementation and 335 during full implementation. Correspondingly, internal control had 723 and 264 patients, external control 1395 and 864 patients. Antimicrobial utilization decreased significantly in the intervention group (p <0.01, 278 vs. 247 defined daily dose per 100 PD), increased in external control (p = 0.02, 237.4 vs. 268.9 defined daily dose per 100 PD) and remained stable in internal control (p = 0.66). Antimicrobial cost decreased in the intervention group (p = 0.03; $154.59 per PD vs. $128.93 per PD), increased in external control (p = 0.01; $109.4 per PD vs. $135.97 per PD) but was stable in internal control (p = 0.27). Mortality, length of stay and nosocomial C. difficile rate in intervention group remained stable. CONCLUSIONS: The antimicrobial stewardship programme reduced antimicrobial use in leukaemia patients without affecting inpatient mortality and length of stay.

Evaluation of a Clostridium difficile infection management policy with clinical pharmacy and medical microbiology involvement at a major Canadian teaching hospital.

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE: Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) represents a spectrum of disease and is a significant concern for healthcare institutions. Our study objective was to assess whether implementation of a regional CDI management policy with Clinical Pharmacy and Medical Microbiology and Infection Control involvement would lead to an improvement in concordance in prescribing practices to an evidence-based CDI disease severity assessment and pharmacological treatment algorithm. METHODS: Conducted at a tertiary care teaching hospital, this two-phase quality assurance study consisted of a baseline retrospective healthcare record review of patients with CDI prior to the implementation of a regional CDI management policy followed by a prospective evaluation post-implementation. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: One hundred and forty-one CDI episodes in the pre-implementation group were compared to 283 episodes post-implementation. Overall treatment concordance to the CDI treatment algorithm was achieved in 48 of 141 cases (34%) pre-implementation compared with 136 of 283 cases (48·1%) post-implementation (P = 0·01). The median time to treatment with vancomycin was reduced from five days to one day (P < 0·01), with median length of hospital stay decreasing from 30 days to 21 days (P = 0·01) post-implementation. There was no difference in 30-day all-cause mortality. WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION: A comprehensive approach with appropriate stakeholder involvement in the development of clinical pathways, education to healthcare workers and prospective audit with intervention and feedback can ensure patients diagnosed with CDI are optimally managed and prescribed the most appropriate therapy based on CDI disease severity.

Randomised controlled trial on the effectiveness of lidocaine gel vs tetracaine drops as the sole topical anaesthetic agent for primary pterygium surgery.

PURPOSE: To determine the effectiveness of lidocaine 2% gel vstetracaine 1% drops in primary pterygium surgery. METHODS: This was a prospective, randomised controlled trial. Forty consecutive patients who had primary pterygium underwent surgical excision of primary pterygium and mitomycin C. Patients were randomised into two groups. Group 1 received tetracaine 1% drops and solcoseryl eye gel (Solco Basel AG, Switzerland). Group 2 received xylocaine 2% gel (lidocaine hydrochloride 2% gel, AstraZeneca, Sweden) topically and normal saline drops 0.9%. Additional tetracaine drops were given to patients who experienced pain preoperatively. The primary outcome was the pain experienced during and after surgery. Immediately after the operation, pain and discomfort scores were assessed by the patients and doctor using a 10-point linear analogue scale. The stages of the operation were divided into the following: stage 1-first incision, stage 2-pterygium body excision, stage 3-conjunctival suturing, and stage 4-immediate postoperative after patching. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference in the mean pain scores experienced during pterygium excision (3.03+/-2.35 for the lidocaine group and 3.98+/-2.18 for the tetracaine group). However, for stage 3, there was a statistically significant difference in mean pain scores experienced during closure (P=0.03) (0.47+/-0.84 for the lidocaine gel group and 1.43+/-1.66 for the tetracaine group), with patients of group 2 experienced less pain. The mean number of additional drops required by the eyes in lidocaine gel group was also significantly (0.16+/-0.11) less than the tetracaine group (0.67+/-0.09, P=0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Topical administration of lidocaine 2% gel or tetracaine 1 % drops are both effective anaesthetic agents for primary pterygium surgery and mitomycin C. However, lidocaine gel is superior to tetracaine eye drops and its application is more convenient with a less frequent application and a sustained duration of action.