Ongoing Efforts to Improve Antimicrobial Utilization in Hospitals among African Countries and Implications for the Future.

There are serious concerns with rising antimicrobial resistance (AMR) across countries increasing morbidity, mortality and costs. These concerns have resulted in a plethora of initiatives globally and nationally including national action plans (NAPs) to reduce AMR. Africa is no exception, especially with the highest rates of AMR globally. Key activities in NAPs include gaining a greater understanding of current antimicrobial utilization patterns through point prevalence surveys (PPS) and subsequently instigating antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs). Consequently, there is a need to comprehensively document current utilization patterns among hospitals across Africa coupled with ASP studies. In total, 33 PPS studies ranging from single up to 18 hospitals were documented from a narrative review with typically over 50% of in-patients prescribed antimicrobials, up to 97.6% in Nigeria. The penicillins, ceftriaxone and metronidazole, were the most prescribed antibiotics. Appreciable extended prescribing of antibiotics up to 6 days or more post-operatively was seen across Africa to prevent surgical site infections. At least 19 ASPs have been instigated across Africa in recent years to improve future prescribing utilizing a range of prescribing indicators. The various findings resulted in a range of suggested activities that key stakeholders, including governments and healthcare professionals, should undertake in the short, medium and long term to improve future antimicrobial prescribing and reduce AMR across Africa.

Validity of Pneumonia Severity Assessment Scores in Africa and South Asia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Although community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) severity assessment scores are widely used, their validity in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) is not well defined. We aimed to investigate the validity and performance of the existing scores among adults in LMICs (Africa and South Asia). METHODS: Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus and Web of Science were searched to 21 May 2020. Studies evaluating a pneumonia severity score/tool among adults in these countries were included. A bivariate random-effects meta-analysis was performed to examine the scores' performance in predicting mortality. RESULTS: Of 9900 records, 11 studies were eligible, covering 12 tools. Only CURB-65 (Confusion, Urea, Respiratory Rate, Blood Pressure, Age ≥ 65 years) and CRB-65 (Confusion, Respiratory Rate, Blood Pressure, Age ≥ 65 years) were included in the meta-analysis. Both scores were effective in predicting mortality risk. Performance characteristics (with 95% Confidence Interval (CI)) at high (CURB-65 ≥ 3, CRB-65 ≥ 3) and intermediate-risk (CURB-65 ≥ 2, CRB-65 ≥ 1) cut-offs were as follows: pooled sensitivity, for CURB-65, 0.70 (95% CI = 0.25-0.94) and 0.96 (95% CI = 0.49-1.00), and for CRB-65, 0.09 (95% CI = 0.01-0.48) and 0.93 (95% CI = 0.50-0.99); pooled specificity, for CURB-65, 0.90 (95% CI = 0.73-0.96) and 0.64 (95% CI = 0.45-0.79), and for CRB-65, 0.99 (95% CI = 0.95-1.00) and 0.43 (95% CI = 0.24-0.64). CONCLUSIONS: CURB-65 and CRB-65 appear to be valid for predicting mortality in LMICs. CRB-65 may be employed where urea levels are unavailable. There is a lack of robust evidence regarding other scores, including the Pneumonia Severity Index (PSI).

Recent innovations and new applications of outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy.

INTRODUCTION: Outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) is safe and effective for selected patients managed within an organized clinical service. Service configurations however are evolving, patient populations are changing and new evidence is emerging which challenges traditional OPAT practice. AREAS COVERED: This review will discuss evolving OPAT service delivery from the traditional model of infusion center toward nonspecialist, community and remotely delivered OPAT and the challenges this represents. We consider new patient populations including those with incurable infection or infections at the end of life and difficult to reach populations including people who inject drugs. The evidence base that underpins the multi-disciplinary approach to OPAT delivery will be examined and particularly the role of the antimicrobial pharmacist and specialist nurse. Evidence for new treatment options which challenge established OPAT practice including complex oral antibiotic regimens, long acting parenteral agents and drug stability in continuous infusion antibiotics will be considered. Finally we emphasize the central importance of antimicrobial stewardship and good clinical governance which should underpin OPAT practice. EXPERT OPINION: Changing patient populations, service structures and team roles coupled with a growing infection management evidence base means that OPAT services and practice must evolve. Challenging traditional practice is essential to ensure best patient outcomes and cost-efficiency.

Mechanisms affecting the implementation of a national antimicrobial stewardship programme; multi-professional perspectives explained using normalisation process theory.

BACKGROUND: Antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) describes activities concerned with safe-guarding antibiotics for the future, reducing drivers for the major global public health threat of antimicrobial resistance (AMR), whereby antibiotics are less effective in preventing and treating infections. Appropriate antibiotic prescribing is central to AMS. Whilst previous studies have explored the effectiveness of specific AMS interventions, largely from uni-professional perspectives, our literature search could not find any existing evidence evaluating the processes of implementing an integrated national AMS programme from multi-professional perspectives. METHODS: This study sought to explain mechanisms affecting the implementation of a national antimicrobial stewardship programme, from multi-professional perspectives. Data collection involved in-depth qualitative telephone interviews with 27 implementation lead clinicians from 14/15 Scottish Health Boards and 15 focus groups with doctors, nurses and clinical pharmacists (n = 72) from five Health Boards, purposively selected for reported prescribing variation. Data was first thematically analysed, barriers and enablers were then categorised, and Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) was used as an interpretive lens to explain mechanisms affecting the implementation process. Analysis addressed the NPT questions 'which group of actors have which problems, in which domains, and what sort of problems impact on the normalisation of AMS into everyday hospital practice'. RESULTS: Results indicated that major barriers relate to organisational context and resource availability. AMS had coherence for implementation leads and prescribing doctors; less so for consultants and nurses who may not access training. Conflicting priorities made obtaining buy-in from some consultants difficult; limited role perceptions meant few nurses or clinical pharmacists engaged with AMS. Collective individual and team action to implement AMS could be constrained by lack of medical continuity and hierarchical relationships. Reflexive monitoring based on audit results was limited by the capacity of AMS Leads to provide direct feedback to practitioners. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides original evidence of barriers and enablers to the implementation of a national AMS programme, from multi-professional, multi-organisational perspectives. The use of a robust theoretical framework (NPT) added methodological rigour to the findings. Our results are of international significance to healthcare policy makers and practitioners seeking to strengthen the sustainable implementation of hospital AMS programmes in comparable contexts.

Optimizing carbapenem use through a national quality improvement programme.

Background: Concern about increasing carbapenem and piperacillin/tazobactam use led the Scottish Antimicrobial Prescribing Group (SAPG) to develop national guidance on optimal use of these agents, and to implement a quality improvement programme to assess the impact of guidance on practice. Objectives: To evaluate how SAPG guidance had been implemented by health boards, assess how this translated into clinical practice, and investigate clinicians' views and behaviours about prescribing carbapenems and alternative agents. Methods: Local implementation of SAPG guidance was assessed using an online survey. A bespoke point prevalence survey was used to evaluate prescribing. Clinicians' experience of using carbapenems and alternatives was examined through semi-structured interviews. National prescribing data were analysed to assess the impact of the programme. Results: There were greater local restrictions for carbapenems than for piperacillin/tazobactam. Laboratory result suppression was inconsistent between boards and carbapenem-sparing antibiotics were not widely available. Compliance with local guidelines was good for meropenem but lower for piperacillin/tazobactam. Indication for use was well documented but review/stop dates were poorly documented for both antibiotics. Decisions to prescribe a carbapenem were influenced by local guidelines and specialist advice. Many clinicians lacked confidence to de-escalate treatment. Use of both antibiotics decreased during the course of the programme. Conclusions: A multifaceted quality improvement programme was used to gather intelligence, promote behaviour change, and focus interventions on the use of carbapenems and piperacillin/tazobactam. Use of these antimicrobials decreased during the programme-a trend not seen elsewhere in Europe. The programme could be generalized to other antimicrobials.

Antimicrobial stewardship in wound care: a Position Paper from the British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy and European Wound Management Association.

BACKGROUND: With the growing global problem of antibiotic resistance it is crucial that clinicians use antibiotics wisely, which largely means following the principles of antimicrobial stewardship (AMS). Treatment of various types of wounds is one of the more common reasons for prescribing antibiotics. OBJECTIVES: This guidance document is aimed at providing clinicians an understanding of: the basic principles of why AMS is important in caring for patients with infected wounds; who should be involved in AMS; and how to conduct AMS for patients with infected wounds. METHODS: We assembled a group of experts in infectious diseases/clinical microbiology (from the British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy) and wound management (from the European Wound Management Association) who, after thoroughly reviewing the available literature and holding teleconferences, jointly produced this guidance document. RESULTS: All open wounds will be colonized with bacteria, but antibiotic therapy is only required for those that are clinically infected. Therapy is usually empirical to start, but definitive therapy should be based on results of appropriately collected specimens for culture. When prescribed, it should be as narrowly focused, and administered for the shortest duration, as possible. AMS teams should be interdisciplinary, especially including specialists in infection and pharmacy, with input from administrative personnel, the treating clinicians and their patients. CONCLUSIONS: Available evidence is limited, but suggests that applying principles of AMS to the care of patients with wounds should help to reduce the unnecessary use of systemic or topical antibiotic therapy and ensure the safest and most clinically effective therapy for infected wounds.