Evaluating the appropriateness of antimicrobial treatment in hospitalized patients: a comparison of three methods.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 20-50% of antimicrobial therapy in hospitalized patients is considered inappropriate, which may be associated with increased morbidity and mortality. The best method for evaluation of appropriateness is not well defined. AIM: To evaluate the rate of appropriate antimicrobial therapy in a secondary hospital using three different methods, and determine the rate of agreement between the different methods. METHODS: A point prevalence study included all adult hospitalized patients receiving systemic antimicrobial therapy during 2016, screened on a single day. Clinical, laboratory and therapeutic data were collected from patient files, and appropriateness was rated with a qualitative evaluation by expert opinion. In addition, a quantitative evaluation was performed according to 11 quality indicators (QIs) rated for each patient. A strict definition of appropriateness was fulfilled if six essential QIs were met, and a lenient definition was fulfilled if at least five QIs were met. Agreement between methods was analysed using kappa statistic. FINDINGS: Among 106 patients included, rates of appropriateness of antimicrobial therapy ranged from 20% to 75%, depending on the method of evaluation. Very low agreement was found between the strict definition and expert opinion (kappa=0.068), and medium agreement was found between the lenient definition and expert opinion (kappa=0.45). CONCLUSIONS: Rates of appropriateness of antimicrobial therapy varied between evaluation methods, with low to moderate agreement between the different methods.

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: a 5-year review of surveillance data in a tertiary care hospital in Saudi Arabia.

BACKGROUND: Staphylococcus aureus is an important pathogen that leads to serious infections in the community and in hospitals. Evidence has shown that the prevalence of infection and colonization with drug-resistant S. aureus, such as methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) and glycopeptide intermediately susceptible S. aureus, is increasing. Authorities must be aware of the prevalence of MRSA infection and colonization in their country in order to implement and monitor infection control policies that help curtail further emergence of this pathogen. OBJECTIVES: To examine the trend of hospital-acquired MRSA infection and colonization in a tertiary care institution in Saudi Arabia during a 5-year period in order to identify specific areas at high risk for MRSA transmission, and to review our MRSA decolonization procedure and outcomes. METHODS: Surveillance data prospectively collected from January 1, 2000, through December 31, 2004, on hospital-acquired (HA) MRSA were analyzed, with an emphasis on the trend of HA-MRSA infection and colonization, areas of high transmission, risk factors, and effectiveness of the implemented decolonization policy. RESULTS: During the study period, 442 cases of HA-MRSA infection and colonization were identified. Of these, 51.2% were infections, and 48.8% were colonizations. An increasing trend in the incidence rates of infection and colonization was noticed during the study period, and most cases were identified on the surgical ward (33.3%) and medical ward (32.1%). Of the 34 infected patients who underwent systematic decolonization, 35.3% were successfully decolonized, and of the 11 who underwent topical decolonization, 63.6% were successfully decolonized. CONCLUSION: The increasing trend of HA-MRSA infections has been a noticeable global problem. We identified a gradual increase in the rates of MRSA colonization and infection in a tertiary care center Saudi Arabia and recognize the importance of abiding by strict infection control policies, including hand hygiene and proper isolation practices. Continued surveillance for MRSA and other emerging multidrug-resistant pathogens is also needed.