Cargando…

Omitted doses as an unintended consequence of a hospital restricted antibacterial system: a retrospective observational study

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to determine the frequency of omitted doses of antibacterial agents and explore a number of risk factors, including the effect of a restricted antibacterial system. METHODS: Antibacterial data were extracted from a hospital electronic prescribing and medic...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Powell, Neil, Franklin, Bryony Dean, Jacklin, Ann, Wilcock, Mike
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4652685/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26316382
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkv264
_version_ 1782401798224478208
author Powell, Neil
Franklin, Bryony Dean
Jacklin, Ann
Wilcock, Mike
author_facet Powell, Neil
Franklin, Bryony Dean
Jacklin, Ann
Wilcock, Mike
author_sort Powell, Neil
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to determine the frequency of omitted doses of antibacterial agents and explore a number of risk factors, including the effect of a restricted antibacterial system. METHODS: Antibacterial data were extracted from a hospital electronic prescribing and medication administration system for the period 1 January to 30 April 2014. Percentage dose omission rates were calculated. Omission rates for the first dose of antibacterial courses were analysed using logistic regression to identify any correlation between first dose omission rates and potential risk factors, including the antibacterials' restriction status and whether or not they were ward stock. RESULTS: The study included 90 761 antibacterial doses. Of these, 6535 (7.2%) were documented as having been omitted; omission of 847 (0.9% of 90 761) was due to medication being unavailable. Non-restricted, ward stock antibacterials had the lowest frequency of omission, with 6.2% (271 of 4391) first doses omitted. The prevalence was 10.4% (27 of 260) for restricted, ward-stock antibacterials (OR = 1.6, 95% CI = 1.0–2.4, P = 0.027) and 15.5% (53 of 341) for non-restricted, non-ward stock antibacterials (OR = 2.7, 95% CI = 2.0–3.7, P < 0.001). Restricted, non-ward stock antibacterials had the highest frequency (30.7%, 71 of 231; OR = 6.2, 95% CI = 4.5–8.4, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Antibacterials not stocked in clinical areas were significantly more likely to be omitted. The prevalence of omitted doses increased further if the antibiotic was also restricted. To achieve safe, effective antimicrobial use, a balance is needed between promoting antimicrobial stewardship and preventing unintended omitted doses.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4652685
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-46526852015-11-25 Omitted doses as an unintended consequence of a hospital restricted antibacterial system: a retrospective observational study Powell, Neil Franklin, Bryony Dean Jacklin, Ann Wilcock, Mike J Antimicrob Chemother Original Research OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to determine the frequency of omitted doses of antibacterial agents and explore a number of risk factors, including the effect of a restricted antibacterial system. METHODS: Antibacterial data were extracted from a hospital electronic prescribing and medication administration system for the period 1 January to 30 April 2014. Percentage dose omission rates were calculated. Omission rates for the first dose of antibacterial courses were analysed using logistic regression to identify any correlation between first dose omission rates and potential risk factors, including the antibacterials' restriction status and whether or not they were ward stock. RESULTS: The study included 90 761 antibacterial doses. Of these, 6535 (7.2%) were documented as having been omitted; omission of 847 (0.9% of 90 761) was due to medication being unavailable. Non-restricted, ward stock antibacterials had the lowest frequency of omission, with 6.2% (271 of 4391) first doses omitted. The prevalence was 10.4% (27 of 260) for restricted, ward-stock antibacterials (OR = 1.6, 95% CI = 1.0–2.4, P = 0.027) and 15.5% (53 of 341) for non-restricted, non-ward stock antibacterials (OR = 2.7, 95% CI = 2.0–3.7, P < 0.001). Restricted, non-ward stock antibacterials had the highest frequency (30.7%, 71 of 231; OR = 6.2, 95% CI = 4.5–8.4, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Antibacterials not stocked in clinical areas were significantly more likely to be omitted. The prevalence of omitted doses increased further if the antibiotic was also restricted. To achieve safe, effective antimicrobial use, a balance is needed between promoting antimicrobial stewardship and preventing unintended omitted doses. Oxford University Press 2015-12 2015-08-27 /pmc/articles/PMC4652685/ /pubmed/26316382 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkv264 Text en © The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
spellingShingle Original Research
Powell, Neil
Franklin, Bryony Dean
Jacklin, Ann
Wilcock, Mike
Omitted doses as an unintended consequence of a hospital restricted antibacterial system: a retrospective observational study
title Omitted doses as an unintended consequence of a hospital restricted antibacterial system: a retrospective observational study
title_full Omitted doses as an unintended consequence of a hospital restricted antibacterial system: a retrospective observational study
title_fullStr Omitted doses as an unintended consequence of a hospital restricted antibacterial system: a retrospective observational study
title_full_unstemmed Omitted doses as an unintended consequence of a hospital restricted antibacterial system: a retrospective observational study
title_short Omitted doses as an unintended consequence of a hospital restricted antibacterial system: a retrospective observational study
title_sort omitted doses as an unintended consequence of a hospital restricted antibacterial system: a retrospective observational study
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4652685/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26316382
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkv264
work_keys_str_mv AT powellneil omitteddosesasanunintendedconsequenceofahospitalrestrictedantibacterialsystemaretrospectiveobservationalstudy
AT franklinbryonydean omitteddosesasanunintendedconsequenceofahospitalrestrictedantibacterialsystemaretrospectiveobservationalstudy
AT jacklinann omitteddosesasanunintendedconsequenceofahospitalrestrictedantibacterialsystemaretrospectiveobservationalstudy
AT wilcockmike omitteddosesasanunintendedconsequenceofahospitalrestrictedantibacterialsystemaretrospectiveobservationalstudy