Cargando…

Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs in Long‐Term Care Settings: A Meta‐Analysis and Systematic Review

BACKGROUND: Antimicrobial stewardship programs have been established in hospitals, but less studied in long‐term care facilities (LTCFs), a setting with unique challenges related to patient populations and available resources. This systematic review sought to provide a comprehensive assessment of an...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wu, Julie Hui‐Chih, Langford, Bradley J., Daneman, Nick, Friedrich, Jan O., Garber, Gary
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7379722/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30517765
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jgs.15675
_version_ 1783562705653727232
author Wu, Julie Hui‐Chih
Langford, Bradley J.
Daneman, Nick
Friedrich, Jan O.
Garber, Gary
author_facet Wu, Julie Hui‐Chih
Langford, Bradley J.
Daneman, Nick
Friedrich, Jan O.
Garber, Gary
author_sort Wu, Julie Hui‐Chih
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Antimicrobial stewardship programs have been established in hospitals, but less studied in long‐term care facilities (LTCFs), a setting with unique challenges related to patient populations and available resources. This systematic review sought to provide a comprehensive assessment of antimicrobial stewardship interventions implemented in LTCFs, using meta‐analysis to examine their impact on overall antimicrobial use. METHODS: Electronic searches of MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL (1990 to July 2018) identified any antimicrobial stewardship interventions in LTCFs, with no restriction on patient population, study design, or outcomes. Intervention components were categorized using the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care taxonomy on implementation strategies. Random‐effects meta‐analysis used ratio of means to facilitate pooling of different metrics of antimicrobial use. RESULTS: Eighteen studies (one randomized controlled trial [RCT], four cluster RCTs, four controlled pre/post studies, and nine uncontrolled pre/post studies) met inclusion, using 13 different antimicrobial stewardship intervention strategies; 15 studies used multifaceted (maximum, seven; median, four) interventions. The three most commonly implemented strategies were educational materials, educational meetings, and guideline implementation. Intervention labor intensity and resource requirements varied considerably among interventions. Meta‐analysis of 11 studies demonstrated that antimicrobial stewardship strategies were associated with a 14% reduction in overall antimicrobial use (95% confidence interval = −8% to −20%; P < .0001), with similar results by study design but high heterogeneity (I(2) = 86%) for the uncontrolled pre/post study subgroup and no heterogeneity (I(2) = 0%) for the cluster RCT and controlled pre/post study subgroups. Funnel plot analysis suggested publication bias, with a lack of publication of smaller studies showing increased antibiotic use. CONCLUSION: Antimicrobial stewardship strategies implemented in long‐term care vary considerably in design and resource intensity, but collectively suggest potential to reduce antimicrobial use in this challenging setting. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:392–399, 2019.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7379722
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73797222020-07-27 Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs in Long‐Term Care Settings: A Meta‐Analysis and Systematic Review Wu, Julie Hui‐Chih Langford, Bradley J. Daneman, Nick Friedrich, Jan O. Garber, Gary J Am Geriatr Soc Review Articles BACKGROUND: Antimicrobial stewardship programs have been established in hospitals, but less studied in long‐term care facilities (LTCFs), a setting with unique challenges related to patient populations and available resources. This systematic review sought to provide a comprehensive assessment of antimicrobial stewardship interventions implemented in LTCFs, using meta‐analysis to examine their impact on overall antimicrobial use. METHODS: Electronic searches of MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL (1990 to July 2018) identified any antimicrobial stewardship interventions in LTCFs, with no restriction on patient population, study design, or outcomes. Intervention components were categorized using the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care taxonomy on implementation strategies. Random‐effects meta‐analysis used ratio of means to facilitate pooling of different metrics of antimicrobial use. RESULTS: Eighteen studies (one randomized controlled trial [RCT], four cluster RCTs, four controlled pre/post studies, and nine uncontrolled pre/post studies) met inclusion, using 13 different antimicrobial stewardship intervention strategies; 15 studies used multifaceted (maximum, seven; median, four) interventions. The three most commonly implemented strategies were educational materials, educational meetings, and guideline implementation. Intervention labor intensity and resource requirements varied considerably among interventions. Meta‐analysis of 11 studies demonstrated that antimicrobial stewardship strategies were associated with a 14% reduction in overall antimicrobial use (95% confidence interval = −8% to −20%; P < .0001), with similar results by study design but high heterogeneity (I(2) = 86%) for the uncontrolled pre/post study subgroup and no heterogeneity (I(2) = 0%) for the cluster RCT and controlled pre/post study subgroups. Funnel plot analysis suggested publication bias, with a lack of publication of smaller studies showing increased antibiotic use. CONCLUSION: Antimicrobial stewardship strategies implemented in long‐term care vary considerably in design and resource intensity, but collectively suggest potential to reduce antimicrobial use in this challenging setting. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:392–399, 2019. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2018-12-05 2019-02 /pmc/articles/PMC7379722/ /pubmed/30517765 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jgs.15675 Text en © 2018 The Authors Journal of the American Geriatrics Society published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of The American Geriatrics Society. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.
spellingShingle Review Articles
Wu, Julie Hui‐Chih
Langford, Bradley J.
Daneman, Nick
Friedrich, Jan O.
Garber, Gary
Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs in Long‐Term Care Settings: A Meta‐Analysis and Systematic Review
title Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs in Long‐Term Care Settings: A Meta‐Analysis and Systematic Review
title_full Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs in Long‐Term Care Settings: A Meta‐Analysis and Systematic Review
title_fullStr Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs in Long‐Term Care Settings: A Meta‐Analysis and Systematic Review
title_full_unstemmed Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs in Long‐Term Care Settings: A Meta‐Analysis and Systematic Review
title_short Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs in Long‐Term Care Settings: A Meta‐Analysis and Systematic Review
title_sort antimicrobial stewardship programs in long‐term care settings: a meta‐analysis and systematic review
topic Review Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7379722/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30517765
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jgs.15675
work_keys_str_mv AT wujuliehuichih antimicrobialstewardshipprogramsinlongtermcaresettingsametaanalysisandsystematicreview
AT langfordbradleyj antimicrobialstewardshipprogramsinlongtermcaresettingsametaanalysisandsystematicreview
AT danemannick antimicrobialstewardshipprogramsinlongtermcaresettingsametaanalysisandsystematicreview
AT friedrichjano antimicrobialstewardshipprogramsinlongtermcaresettingsametaanalysisandsystematicreview
AT garbergary antimicrobialstewardshipprogramsinlongtermcaresettingsametaanalysisandsystematicreview