Characterizing Antibiotic Allergy Labels in a Large UK Hospital Population to Inform Antimicrobial Stewardship and Delabeling Assessment Strategy.

BACKGROUND: Antibiotic allergy labels are important barriers to treatment and antimicrobial stewardship, but their prevalence in UK hospitals is poorly described. OBJECTIVE: To ascertain the prevalence and characteristics of antibiotic allergy labels in a large UK hospital setting and estimate the proportion of penicillin allergy labels for which point-of-care (POC) delabeling assessment would be appropriate. METHODS: Electronic health records data were analyzed from all patients treated at Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust in 2019. Validated POC delabeling risk stratification criteria were retrospectively applied to penicillin allergy labels. RESULTS: Recorded reactions to antibiotics were present in 11.8% of all patients (32,148 of 273,216), 16.3% of inpatients (13,874 of 85,230), and 9.7% of outpatients (18,274 of 187,986). Penicillins were the commonest reaction precipitant described (9.0% of patients; 24,646 of 273,216), followed by sulfonamides/trimethoprim (1.4%; 3869 of 273,216) and macrolides/lincosamides (1.3%; 3644 of 273,216). A total of 3.9% of inpatients had recorded reactions to >1 antibiotic class (3348 of 85,230). Cutaneous manifestations were the most commonly described reaction features (40.7% of labels; 15,821 of 38,902). Of 15,949 labels describing probable or possible penicillin "allergy" with sufficient detail to allow for the retrospective assessment of POC delabeling suitability, 1702 were deemed suitable for removal or downgrading of the label to "intolerance" without further investigation (10.7%), 11,887 were appropriate for POC assessment using an oral penicillin challenge (OPC) or OPC with prior bedside skin testing (74.5%), and 2360 were identified as unsuitable for any form of POC assessment (14.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Antibiotic allergy labels are highly prevalent in a UK hospital setting. A large proportion of penicillin allergy labels may be suitable for POC delabeling assessment.

Practical Pharmacist-Led Interventions to Improve Antimicrobial Stewardship in Ghana, Tanzania, Uganda and Zambia.

The World Health Organisation (WHO) and others have identified, as a priority, the need to improve antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) interventions as part of the effort to tackle antimicrobial resistance (AMR). An international health partnership model, the Commonwealth Partnerships for Antimicrobial Stewardship (CwPAMS) programme, was established between selected countries in Africa (Ghana, Tanzania, Zambia and Uganda) and the UK to support AMS. This was funded by UK aid under the Fleming Fund and managed by the Commonwealth Pharmacists Association (CPA) and Tropical Health and Education Trust (THET). The primary aims were to develop local AMS teams and generate antimicrobial consumption surveillance data, quality improvement initiatives, infection prevention and control (IPC) and education/training to reduce AMR. Education and training were key components in achieving this, with pharmacists taking a lead role in developing and leading AMS interventions. Pharmacist-led interventions in Ghana improved access to national antimicrobial prescribing guidelines via the CwPAMS mobile app and improved compliance with policy from 18% to 70% initially for patients with pneumonia in one outpatient clinic. Capacity development on AMS and IPC were achieved in both Tanzania and Zambia, and a train-the-trainer model on the local production of alcohol hand rub in Uganda and Zambia. The model of pharmacy health partnerships has been identified as a model with great potential to be used in other low and middle income countries (LMICs) to support tackling AMR.

Adherence to antibiotic guidelines and reported penicillin allergy: pooled cohort data on prescribing and allergy documentation from two English National Health Service (NHS) trusts.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate documentation of antimicrobial allergy and to determine prescribing adherence to local antibiotic guidelines for inpatients with and without reported penicillin allergy treated for infection in a National Health Service (NHS) context. SETTING: Data were collected at two English hospital NHS trusts over two time-periods: June 2016 and February 2017. DESIGN: Cohort study. Trust 1 data were sourced from prospective point prevalence surveys. Trust 2 data were extracted retrospectively from an electronic report. PARTICIPANTS: Inpatients treated for urinary tract infection (UTI), community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) and skin and soft tissue infection (SSTI). Data on allergy were collected, and antibiotic selection assessed for adherence to trust guidelines with differences between groups presented as adjusted ORs. RESULTS: A total of 1497 patients were included, with 2645 antibiotics orders. Patients were treated for CAP (n=495; 33.1%), UTI (407; 27.2%), HAP (330; 22%) and SSTI (265; 17.7%). There were 240 (16%) patients with penicillin allergy. Penicillin allergy was recorded as allergy (n=52; 21.7%), side effect (27; 11.3%) and no documentation (161; 67.1%). Overall, 2184 (82.6%) antibiotic orders were guideline-adherent. Adherence was greatest for those labelled penicillin allergy (453 of 517; 87.6%) versus no allergy (1731 of 2128; 81.3%) (OR 0.52 (95% CI 0.37 to 0.73) p<0.001). Guideline-adherence for CAP was higher if penicillin allergy (151 of 163; 92.6%) versus no allergy (582 of 810; 71.9%) (OR 0.20 (95% CI 0.10 to 0.37) p<0.001). There was no difference in adherence between those with and without penicillin allergy for UTI, HAP or SSTI treatment. CONCLUSIONS: A relatively high proportion of patients had a penicillin allergy and two thirds of these had no description of their allergy, which has important implications for patient safety. Patients with penicillin allergy treated for CAP, received more guideline adherent antibiotics than those without allergy. Future studies investigating the clinical impact of penicillin allergy should include data on adherence to antibiotic guidelines.

Patient and public understanding and knowledge of antimicrobial resistance and stewardship in a UK hospital: should public campaigns change focus?

BACKGROUND: The rising global tide of antimicrobial resistance is a well-described phenomenon. Employing effective and innovative antimicrobial stewardship strategies is an essential approach to combat this public health threat. Education of the public and patients is paramount to enable the success of such strategies. METHODS: A panel of hospital multidisciplinary healthcare professionals was set up and a short quiz containing true/false statements around antimicrobial stewardship and resistance was designed and piloted. An educational leaflet with the correct replies and supporting information was also produced and disseminated. Participants were recruited on a single day (18 November 2015) from the hospital outpatient clinics and the hospital outpatient pharmacy waiting room. RESULTS: One hundred and forty-five completed quizzes were returned, providing a total of 1450 answers. Overall, 934 of 1450 (64%) statements were scored correctly whilst 481 (33%) were scored incorrectly; 35 (3%) statements were left unscored. We speculate that these results may demonstrate that respondents understood the statements, as only a small proportion of statements were left unanswered. The question dealing with the definition of antimicrobial resistance and the question dealing with the definition of antimicrobial stewardship obtained the most incorrect replies (85% and 72%, respectively). However, a specific factual recall question regarding only one microorganism (MRSA) received the most correct responses (99%). CONCLUSIONS: We describe a simple, innovative method of engagement with patients and the general public to help educate and disseminate important public health messages around antimicrobial resistance and stewardship. We also identified the need for public health campaigns to address the knowledge gaps found around this topic.