Cargando…

1101. What Do Electrophysiologists Think about Peri-Procedural Antibiotics? A Qualitative Assessment of Factors Driving Use and Facilitators for Implementing Change

BACKGROUND: Prolonged courses of antimicrobials are common following cardiac device procedures, but there are little data to explain drivers of this practice and factors that may facilitate change. METHODS: We conducted formative evaluations consisting of semi-structured, qualitative interviews with...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Branch-Elliman, Westyn, Elwy, Rani, Gupta, Kalpana
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6811301/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofz360.965
_version_ 1783462449854283776
author Branch-Elliman, Westyn
Elwy, Rani
Gupta, Kalpana
author_facet Branch-Elliman, Westyn
Elwy, Rani
Gupta, Kalpana
author_sort Branch-Elliman, Westyn
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Prolonged courses of antimicrobials are common following cardiac device procedures, but there are little data to explain drivers of this practice and factors that may facilitate change. METHODS: We conducted formative evaluations consisting of semi-structured, qualitative interviews with electrophysiologists (EP) to identify perceived barriers to discontinuing post-procedure antimicrobial prophylaxis and factors that may facilitate improvements. A directed content analysis approach was used to map qualitative responses to key factors in the Proctor Implementation Outcomes Framework, with flexibility to allow for new themes to emerge. Interviews ceased after data saturation was reached. RESULTS: 13 interviews were conducted with EPs representing diverse US regions (Northeast, Midwest, South, West) and diverse settings of care (academic, community, VA). Responses to questions about antimicrobial use and willingness (or lack thereof) to stop post-procedural antimicrobials most commonly mapped to the acceptability domain; feasibility, fidelity, cost and appropriateness were also frequently identified factors (see figure for exemplary quotes). Themes that emerged during the interview process associated with prolonged antimicrobial prescribing included beliefs and knowledge, local culture and normative behaviors, and organizational structure. There was a strong “cultural inertia” to conform to normative practices within an institution. Reasons for this ranged from reports of streamlining processes for clinical staff to ensure standardized care across all patients and concerns about being perceived as an “outlier.” Infectious diseases staff were important influencers of practice and potential facilitators of improvement. CONCLUSION: Formative evaluations of stakeholders are essential for designing successful implementation interventions to facilitate behavioral change. Local culture appeared to be a major driver of antimicrobial use. The desire to conform to normative behaviors and to promote institutional standardization suggests that strategies to facilitate implementation of antimicrobial stewardship guidelines must include facility-level changes, rather than individual-provider-level interventions. [Image: see text] DISCLOSURES: All authors: No reported disclosures.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6811301
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-68113012019-10-29 1101. What Do Electrophysiologists Think about Peri-Procedural Antibiotics? A Qualitative Assessment of Factors Driving Use and Facilitators for Implementing Change Branch-Elliman, Westyn Elwy, Rani Gupta, Kalpana Open Forum Infect Dis Abstracts BACKGROUND: Prolonged courses of antimicrobials are common following cardiac device procedures, but there are little data to explain drivers of this practice and factors that may facilitate change. METHODS: We conducted formative evaluations consisting of semi-structured, qualitative interviews with electrophysiologists (EP) to identify perceived barriers to discontinuing post-procedure antimicrobial prophylaxis and factors that may facilitate improvements. A directed content analysis approach was used to map qualitative responses to key factors in the Proctor Implementation Outcomes Framework, with flexibility to allow for new themes to emerge. Interviews ceased after data saturation was reached. RESULTS: 13 interviews were conducted with EPs representing diverse US regions (Northeast, Midwest, South, West) and diverse settings of care (academic, community, VA). Responses to questions about antimicrobial use and willingness (or lack thereof) to stop post-procedural antimicrobials most commonly mapped to the acceptability domain; feasibility, fidelity, cost and appropriateness were also frequently identified factors (see figure for exemplary quotes). Themes that emerged during the interview process associated with prolonged antimicrobial prescribing included beliefs and knowledge, local culture and normative behaviors, and organizational structure. There was a strong “cultural inertia” to conform to normative practices within an institution. Reasons for this ranged from reports of streamlining processes for clinical staff to ensure standardized care across all patients and concerns about being perceived as an “outlier.” Infectious diseases staff were important influencers of practice and potential facilitators of improvement. CONCLUSION: Formative evaluations of stakeholders are essential for designing successful implementation interventions to facilitate behavioral change. Local culture appeared to be a major driver of antimicrobial use. The desire to conform to normative behaviors and to promote institutional standardization suggests that strategies to facilitate implementation of antimicrobial stewardship guidelines must include facility-level changes, rather than individual-provider-level interventions. [Image: see text] DISCLOSURES: All authors: No reported disclosures. Oxford University Press 2019-10-23 /pmc/articles/PMC6811301/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofz360.965 Text en © The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
spellingShingle Abstracts
Branch-Elliman, Westyn
Elwy, Rani
Gupta, Kalpana
1101. What Do Electrophysiologists Think about Peri-Procedural Antibiotics? A Qualitative Assessment of Factors Driving Use and Facilitators for Implementing Change
title 1101. What Do Electrophysiologists Think about Peri-Procedural Antibiotics? A Qualitative Assessment of Factors Driving Use and Facilitators for Implementing Change
title_full 1101. What Do Electrophysiologists Think about Peri-Procedural Antibiotics? A Qualitative Assessment of Factors Driving Use and Facilitators for Implementing Change
title_fullStr 1101. What Do Electrophysiologists Think about Peri-Procedural Antibiotics? A Qualitative Assessment of Factors Driving Use and Facilitators for Implementing Change
title_full_unstemmed 1101. What Do Electrophysiologists Think about Peri-Procedural Antibiotics? A Qualitative Assessment of Factors Driving Use and Facilitators for Implementing Change
title_short 1101. What Do Electrophysiologists Think about Peri-Procedural Antibiotics? A Qualitative Assessment of Factors Driving Use and Facilitators for Implementing Change
title_sort 1101. what do electrophysiologists think about peri-procedural antibiotics? a qualitative assessment of factors driving use and facilitators for implementing change
topic Abstracts
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6811301/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofz360.965
work_keys_str_mv AT branchellimanwestyn 1101whatdoelectrophysiologiststhinkaboutperiproceduralantibioticsaqualitativeassessmentoffactorsdrivinguseandfacilitatorsforimplementingchange
AT elwyrani 1101whatdoelectrophysiologiststhinkaboutperiproceduralantibioticsaqualitativeassessmentoffactorsdrivinguseandfacilitatorsforimplementingchange
AT guptakalpana 1101whatdoelectrophysiologiststhinkaboutperiproceduralantibioticsaqualitativeassessmentoffactorsdrivinguseandfacilitatorsforimplementingchange