Cargando…

Evaluating a pilot, structured, face-to-face, antimicrobial stewardship, prospective audit-and-feedback program in emergency general surgery service in a community hospital

BACKGROUND: Prospective audit and feedback (PAF) is an established practice in critical care settings but not in surgical populations. We pilot-tested a structured face-to-face PAF program for our acute-care surgery (ACS) service. METHODS: This was a mixed-methods study. For the quantitative analysi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chan, April J., Tsang, Melanie E., Langford, Bradley J., Nisenbaum, Rosane, Wan, Michael, Downing, Mark A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Cambridge University Press 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10265735/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37325681
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/ash.2023.168
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Prospective audit and feedback (PAF) is an established practice in critical care settings but not in surgical populations. We pilot-tested a structured face-to-face PAF program for our acute-care surgery (ACS) service. METHODS: This was a mixed-methods study. For the quantitative analysis, the structured PAF period was from August 1, 2017, to April 30, 2019. The ad hoc PAF period was from May 1, 2019, to January 31, 2021. Interrupted time-series segmented negative binomial regression analysis was used to evaluate change in antimicrobial usage measured in days of therapy per 1,000 patient days for all systemic and targeted antimicrobials. Secondary outcomes included C. difficile infections, length of stay and readmission within 30 days. Each secondary outcome was analyzed using a logistic regression or negative binomial regression model. For the qualitative analyses, all ACS surgeons and trainees from November 23, 2015, to April 30, 2019, were invited to participate in an email-based anonymous survey developed using implementation science principles. Responses were measured using counts. RESULTS: In total, 776 ACS patients were included in the structured PAF period and 783 patients were included in the in ad hoc PAF period. No significant changes in level or trend for antimicrobial usage were detected for all and targeted antimicrobials. Similarly, no significant differences were detected for secondary outcomes. The survey response rate was 25% (n = 10). Moreover, 50% agreed that PAF provided them with skills to use antimicrobials more judiciously, and 80% agreed that PAF improved the quality of antimicrobial treatment for their patients. CONCLUSION: Structured PAF showed clinical outcomes similar to ad hoc PAF. Structured PAF was well received and was perceived as beneficial by surgical staff.