Cultures of antibiotic prescribing in medical intensive care.

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) continues to present a challenge to international healthcare systems and structures of public health. The focus on optimizing antibiotic prescribing in human populations has challenged healthcare systems charged with making responsible their physician-prescribers. In the United States, physicians in almost every specialty and role use antibiotics as part of their therapeutic armamentariums. In United States hospitals, most patients are administered antibiotics during their stay. Therefore, antibiotic prescribing and utilization is a commonly accepted part of medical practice. In this paper, we utilize social science work on antibiotic prescribing to examine a critical space of care in United States hospital settings. From March to August 2018, we used ethnographic methods to study hospital-based medical intensive care unit physicians at the offices and hospital floors they frequent in two urban United States teaching hospitals. We focused on eliciting the interactions and discussions surrounding antibiotic decision-making that are uniquely influenced by the context of medical intensive care units. We argue that antibiotic use in the medical intensive care units under study was shaped by urgency, hierarchy, and uncertainty representative of the medical intensive care unit's role within the larger hospital system. We conclude that by studying the culture of antibiotic prescribing in medical intensive care units, we can see more clearly both the vulnerability of the looming antimicrobial resistance crisis and by contrast the perceived insignificance of stewarding antibiotic use when considered alongside the fragility of life amidst acute medical concerns regularly experienced in the unit.

Instant Gratification and Overtreating to Be Safe: Perceptions of U.S. Intensive Care Unit Pharmacists and Residents on Antimicrobial Stewardship.

Antimicrobial stewardship programs have been associated with numerous impacts on medical practice including reductions in costs, antimicrobial resistance, and adverse events. While antimicrobial stewardship is now considered an essential element of medical practice, the understandings of the value of antimicrobial stewardship among medical practitioners vary. Additionally, non-physician practitioners are regularly left out of antimicrobial stewardship interventions targeting antimicrobial decision-making. Here, we contribute the perspective from resident physicians and specialists in pharmacy regarding their involvement in antimicrobial prescribing. Notably, our semi-structured interviews with 10 residents and pharmacy specialists described their limited autonomy in the clinical setting. However, the participants regularly worked alongside primary antimicrobial decision-makers and described feeling pressure to overtreat to be safe. The clear rationales and motivations associated with antimicrobial prescribing have a noticeable impact on physicians in training and non-physician practitioners, and as such, we argue that antimicrobial stewardship interventions targeting primary antimicrobial decision-makers are missing an opportunity to address the breadth of antimicrobial prescribing culture. By looking at the perspectives and rationales of physicians in training and non-physician practitioners, we can see evidence that the act of antimicrobial prescribing is impacted by individuals on all levels of the hierarchies present in medical practice.

Antimicrobial prescribing matters: the irreconcilability in moral ranking systems.

Antimicrobial resistance caused by widespread use of antimicrobials is a defining challenge of our time. This article presents antimicrobial prescribing among physicians as a morally irreconcilable endeavour. Particularly, the physician may have no good option when antimicrobial resistance is seen as both (1) a global threat to be addressed at the population level, and (2) a threat to the individual patient to be addressed in clinical practice. This research demonstrates that in practice, the physician is presented with an irreconcilable dilemma between caring for the population or caring for the individual. The author utilizes an extended ethnographic case study of infectious disease specialists to show that physicians are pressured to use antimicrobials more responsibly for the benefit of society, yet at the same time treat the individual patients with care by administering the most effective and appropriate agents. The author concludes by suggesting that there is no straightforward answer for the practicing physician, since what ultimately matters is unlikely to satisfy either moral ranking system.

Healthcare personnel experiences implementing carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales infection control measures at a ventilator-capable skilled nursing facility-A qualitative analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Ventilator-capable skilled nursing facilities (vSNFs) are critical to the epidemiology and control of antibiotic-resistant organisms. During an infection prevention intervention to control carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE), we conducted a qualitative study to characterize vSNF healthcare personnel beliefs and experiences regarding infection control measures. DESIGN: A qualitative study involving semistructured interviews. SETTING: One vSNF in the Chicago, Illinois, metropolitan region. PARTICIPANTS: The study included 17 healthcare personnel representing management, nursing, and nursing assistants. METHODS: We used face-to-face, semistructured interviews to measure healthcare personnel experiences with infection control measures at the midpoint of a 2-year quality improvement project. RESULTS: Healthcare personnel characterized their facility as a home-like environment, yet they recognized that it is a setting where germs were 'invisible' and potentially 'threatening.' Healthcare personnel described elaborate self-protection measures to avoid acquisition or transfer of germs to their own household. Healthcare personnel were motivated to implement infection control measures to protect residents, but many identified structural barriers such as understaffing and time constraints, and some reported persistent preference for soap and water. CONCLUSIONS: Healthcare personnel in vSNFs, from management to frontline staff, understood germ theory and the significance of multidrug-resistant organism transmission. However, their ability to implement infection control measures was hampered by resource limitations and mixed beliefs regarding the effectiveness of infection control measures. Self-protection from acquiring multidrug-resistant organisms was a strong motivator for healthcare personnel both outside and inside the workplace, and it could explain variation in adherence to infection control measures such as a higher hand hygiene adherence after resident care than before resident care.

Finding "What's Wrong With Us": Antibiotic Prescribing Practice Among Physicians in the United States.

Antibiotic stewardship-or the responsible use of antibiotics-has been touted as a solution to the problem of antibiotic resistance. Antibiotic stewardship in medical institutions attempts to change the antibiotic prescribing "behaviors" and "habits" of physicians. Interventions abound targeting "problem prescribers," or those physicians whose practice is out of line with physician peers. Thus, the locus of decision-making in antibiotic prescribing is thought to be the found with the individual physician. Based on 18 months of participant observation and in-depth interviewing of antibiotic-prescribing physicians at two medical institutions in the United States, this paper will question notions of antibiotic stewardship that center on individual "behaviors" and "habits." Many physicians have taken to heart a reductionist approach in studies of antibiotic prescribing, including several physicians I encountered during research who enthusiastically located the benefit of my research in the ability to identify "what's wrong with us." In this paper, I use two representative ethnographic case studies to argue that antibiotic stewardship interventions aimed at identifying and correcting "bad" physician practice limit the possibilities of understanding the social dynamics of the institution. Through an analysis of everyday encounters in the hospital setting, I show how decision-making in antibiotic prescribing can more productively be located between and among institutions, physicians, patient charts, and other hospital-based staff members (e.g., pharmacists, nurses). By demonstrating that antibiotic prescribing is a collective practice occurring through engagement with social and material surroundings, I argue that we can better account for the weighted ways in which social action and relations unfold over time.