1Weill Cornell Medicine,New York,New York.
3Columbia University Medical Center,New York,New York.
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2018 Mar;39(3):316-322. doi: 10.1017/ice.2017.317. Epub 2018 Feb 6.
OBJECTIVE To assess antimicrobial prescriber knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) regarding antimicrobial stewardship (AS) and associated barriers to optimal prescribing. DESIGN Cross-sectional survey. SETTING Online survey. PARTICIPANTS A convenience sample of 2,900 US antimicrobial prescribers at 5 acute-care hospitals within a hospital network. INTERVENTION The following characteristics were assessed with an anonymous, online survey in February 2015: attitudes and practices related to antimicrobial resistance, AS programs, and institutional AS resources; antimicrobial prescribing and AS knowledge; and practices and confidence related to antimicrobial prescribing. RESULTS In total, 402 respondents completed the survey. Knowledge gaps were identified through case-based questions. Some respondents sometimes selected overly broad therapy for the susceptibilities given (29%) and some "usually" or "always" preferred using the most broad-spectrum empiric antimicrobials possible (32%). Nearly all (99%) reported reviewing antimicrobial appropriateness at 48-72 hours, but only 55% reported "always" doing so. Furthermore, 45% of respondents felt that they had not received adequate training regarding antimicrobial prescribing. Some respondents lacked confidence selecting empiric therapy using antibiograms (30%), interpreting susceptibility results (24%), de-escalating therapy (18%), and determining duration of therapy (31%). Postprescription review and feedback (PPRF) was the most commonly cited AS intervention (79%) with potential to improve patient care. CONCLUSIONS Barriers to appropriate antimicrobial selection and de-escalation of antimicrobial therapy were identified among front-line prescribers in acute-care hospitals. Prescribers desired more AS-related education and identified PPRF as the most helpful AS intervention to improve patient care. Educational interventions should be preceded by and tailored to local assessment of educational needs. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2018;39:316-322.
评估抗菌药物处方者对抗菌药物管理(AS)的知识、态度和实践(KAP),以及与优化处方相关的障碍。
横断面调查。
医院网络内的 5 家急性护理医院的在线调查。
该医院网络内的 5 家急性护理医院的 2900 名美国抗菌药物处方者的便利样本。
于 2015 年 2 月,通过匿名在线调查评估以下特征:与抗菌药物耐药性、AS 计划和机构 AS 资源相关的态度和实践;抗菌药物处方和 AS 知识;以及与抗菌药物处方相关的实践和信心。
共有 402 名受访者完成了调查。通过基于案例的问题确定了知识差距。一些受访者有时会根据药敏结果选择过于广泛的治疗方案(29%),一些受访者“通常”或“总是”更喜欢使用最广谱的经验性抗菌药物(32%)。几乎所有(99%)的受访者都报告在 48-72 小时内审查抗菌药物的适宜性,但只有 55%的受访者“总是”这样做。此外,45%的受访者认为他们没有接受过足够的抗菌药物处方培训。一些受访者在选择经验性治疗方案时缺乏信心(30%),包括使用抗生素谱解读药敏结果(24%)、降级治疗(18%)和确定治疗时间(31%)。抗菌药物处方后审核和反馈(PPRF)是最常被引用的 AS 干预措施(79%),它有可能改善患者的护理。
在急性护理医院的一线处方者中,发现了适当选择抗菌药物和降低抗菌药物治疗强度的障碍。处方者希望获得更多的 AS 相关教育,并认为 PPRF 是改善患者护理的最有帮助的 AS 干预措施。教育干预措施应在进行之前和根据当地的教育需求进行定制。