ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To assess the accuracy of antibiotic indication documentation provided during order entry and prescriber perceptions of the requirement to specify indications. METHODS: Patients who received 1 of 6 selected antibiotics from May 1 through June 30, 2017, were identified. Records of 30 randomly selected patients who received each study antibiotic were retrospectively reviewed. The primary endpoint was indication accuracy, defined as agreement of the indication entered during order entry with that documented in progress notes at the time of order entry. Secondary endpoints included correlation of entered indication and final diagnosis for empiric antibiotics. A brief survey was emailed to prescribers to assess the burden and perceptions of requiring an indication during order entry. RESULTS: Four thousand five hundred twenty-four patients received 1 or more doses of a study antibiotic. For the 180 patients selected for evaluation, 89.4% of indications were accurate. Indications for antibiotics ordered for prophylaxis were more likely to be inaccurate than those for empiric or definitive antibiotics (accuracy rates of 46%, 94%, and 92%, respectively, p < 0.05). For empiric antibiotics, 78.5% of indications documented at order entry matched the final diagnosis. Two hundred fifty-four of 863 prescribers (29%) responded to the survey request. Most respondents felt that documenting the indication took no more than 20 seconds, was a "minor nuisance" or "occasionally burdensome," and had no impact on their consideration of antibiotic appropriateness. CONCLUSION: With the exception of prophylaxis, the indications documented during order entry were sufficiently accurate to assist antimicrobial stewardship efforts. Although indication documentation was perceived as a minor burden, surveyed prescribers indicated it had only a minimal beneficial effect on antibiotic prescribing.
