Gianpiero Tebano

Managing responsible antimicrobial use: perspectives across the healthcare system

BACKGROUND Healthcare systems consist of building blocks. Shaping how these building blocks function and interact can promote responsible antimicrobial use, and this represents an important opportunity for managers at different points within healthcare systems to act upon. AIMS To review real-world examples of how healthcare systems can promote responsible antimicrobial use, focusing on the role of governance and managers. SOURCES We searched and reviewed existing literature and official documents, which mostly focused on antibiotics. We also drew on the diverse experiences of the ESGAP (the ESCMID (European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases) Study Group for Antimicrobial stewardshiP) network. CONTENT First, we explored at the institution level the implementation of antimicrobial stewardship programmes, the need to embrace multidisciplinary approaches, the benefits of engaging with social sciences experts, and the role of governance and leadership. We look beyond individual institutions and highlight the urgent need for workforce capacity estimates for antimicrobial stewardship activities, how antimicrobial stewardship efforts can connect to form networks, and the importance of governance and regulation at national and international levels. IMPLICATIONS Managers in the healthcare system are in a strong position to look beyond individual prescriptions and to recognize the many ways in which different healthcare system building blocks can contribute to responsible use of antimicrobials. At the institution level this can be achieved by implementing antimicrobial stewardship programmes, ensuring they are adequately resourced, and driving buy-in across clinical leadership. At regional and national levels this includes facilitating the sharing of experiences and resources between institutions, and developing the standards and regulations needed to support responsible antimicrobial use.

Quality indicators for responsible antibiotic use in the inpatient setting: a systematic review followed by an international multidisciplinary consensus procedure

Abstract Background This study was conducted as part of the Driving Reinvestment in Research and Development and Responsible Antibiotic Use (DRIVE-AB) project and aimed to develop generic quality indicators (QIs) for responsible antibiotic use in the inpatient setting. Methods A RAND-modified Delphi method was applied. First, QIs were identified by a systematic review. A complementary search was performed on web sites of relevant organizations. Duplicates were removed and disease and patient-specific QIs were combined into generic indicators. The relevance of these QIs was appraised by a multidisciplinary international stakeholder panel through two questionnaires and an in-between consensus meeting. Results The systematic review retrieved 70 potential generic QIs. The QIs were appraised by 25 international stakeholders with diverse backgrounds (medical community, public health, patients, antibiotic research and development, regulators, governments). Ultimately, 51 QIs were selected in consensus. QIs with the highest relevance score included: (i) an antibiotic plan should be documented in the medical record at the start of the antibiotic treatment; (ii) the results of bacteriological susceptibility testing should be documented in the medical record; (iii) the local guidelines should correspond to the national guidelines but should be adapted based on local resistance patterns; (iv) an antibiotic stewardship programme should be in place at the healthcare facility; and (v) allergy status should be taken into account when antibiotics are prescribed. Conclusions This systematic and stepwise method combining evidence from literature and stakeholder opinion led to multidisciplinary international consensus on generic inpatient QIs that can be used globally to assess the quality of antibiotic use.

Metrics to assess the quantity of antibiotic use in the outpatient setting: a systematic review followed by an international multidisciplinary consensus procedure

Abstract Background The international Innovative Medicines Initiative (IMI) project DRIVE-AB (Driving Reinvestment in Research and Development and Responsible Antibiotic Use) aims to develop a global definition of ‘responsible’ antibiotic use. Objectives To identify consensually validated quantity metrics for antibiotic use in the outpatient setting. Methods First, outpatient quantity metrics (OQMs) were identified by a systematic search of literature and web sites published until 12 December 2014. Identified OQMs were evaluated by a multidisciplinary, international stakeholder panel using a RAND-modified Delphi procedure. Two online questionnaires and a face-to-face meeting between them were conducted to assess OQM relevance for measuring the quantity of antibiotic use on a nine-point Likert scale, to add comments or to propose new metrics. Results A total of 597 articles were screened, 177 studies met criteria for full-text screening and 138 were finally included. Twenty different OQMs were identified and appraised by 23 stakeholders. During the first survey, 14 OQMs were excluded and 6 qualified for discussion. During the face-to-face meeting, 10 stakeholders retained five OQMs and suggestions were made considering context and combination of metrics. The final set of metrics included defined daily doses, treatments/courses and prescriptions per defined population, treatments/courses and prescriptions per defined number of physician contacts and seasonal variation of total antibiotic use. Conclusions A small set of consensually validated metrics to assess the quantity of antibiotic use in the outpatient setting was obtained, enabling (inter)national comparisons. The OQMs will help build a global conceptual framework for responsible antibiotic use.

Variation in antibiotic use among and within different settings: a systematic review

Abstract Objectives Variation in antibiotic use may reflect inappropriate use. We aimed to systematically describe the variation in measures for antibiotic use among settings or providers. This study was conducted as part of the innovative medicines initiative (IMI)-funded international project DRIVE-AB. Methods We searched for studies published in MEDLINE from January 2004 to January 2015 reporting variation in measures for systemic antibiotic use (e.g. DDDs) in inpatient and outpatient settings. The ratio between a study’s reported maximum and minimum values of a given measure [maximum:minimum ratio (MMR)] was calculated as a measure of variation. Similar measures were grouped into categories and when possible the overall median ratio and IQR were calculated. Results One hundred and forty-three studies were included, of which 85 (59.4%) were conducted in Europe and 12 (8.4%) in low- to middle-income countries. Most studies described the variation in the quantity of antibiotic use in the inpatient setting (81/143, 56.6%), especially among hospitals (41/81, 50.6%). The most frequent measure was DDDs with different denominators, reported in 23/81 (28.4%) inpatient studies and in 28/62 (45.2%) outpatient studies. For this measure, we found a median MMR of 3.7 (IQR 2.6–5.0) in 4 studies reporting antibiotic use in ICUs in DDDs/1000 patient-days and a median MMR of 2.3 (IQR 1.5–3.2) in 18 studies reporting outpatient antibiotic use in DDDs/1000 inhabitant-days. Substantial variation was also identified in other measures. Conclusions Our review confirms the large variation in antibiotic use even across similar settings and providers. Data from low- and middle-income countries are under-represented. Further studies should try to better elucidate reasons for the observed variation to facilitate interventions that reduce unwarranted practice variation. In addition, the heterogeneity of reported measures clearly shows that there is need for standardization.

Public knowledge and behaviours concerning antibiotic use and resistance in France: a cross-sectional survey

PurposeTo evaluate knowledge and behaviours concerning antibiotics and bacterial resistance in the French population, and to identify the socio-demographic factors associated with a high level of such knowledge and appropriate behaviours.MethodsA survey of the general population was conducted in 2015 in northeast France. The 44-item standardized questionnaire used comprised three parts, focusing on the assessment of knowledge, behaviours, and the collection of main socio-demographic characteristics of respondents (gender, age, having children, education level, and profession). The association of these characteristics with the level of knowledge about antibiotics, and with related behaviours, as well as the association between knowledge and behaviours was identified in a bivariate analysis (Chi-2 tests) and a multivariate analysis when necessary (logistic regression).ResultsThe 200 respondents had quite a good level of knowledge about antibiotics for several points: the lack of effectiveness of antibiotics for colds (75.5%), the risk of inefficacy of antibiotics when misused (93%), and the effects of overconsumption on bacterial resistance (92%). Conversely, the effects of different doses and treatment durations on resistance were less well known. Inappropriate behaviours were frequent, especially non-adherence to dosing schedules and to treatment duration (35.5%), and self-medication practices (18%). Female gender, older age, and having children were independently associated with a good level of knowledge. A low level of education and older age were associated with appropriate behaviours.ConclusionsNo association was found between knowledge and behaviours, highlighting the relevance of national public information campaigns to limit the misuse of antibiotics.

Defensive medicine among antibiotic stewards: the international ESCMID AntibioLegalMap survey

Objectives To investigate fear of legal claims and defensive behaviours among specialists in infectious diseases (ID) and clinical microbiology (CM) and to identify associated demographic and professional characteristics. Methods AntibioLegalMap was an international cross-sectional internet-based survey targeting specialists in ID and CM. Three variables were explored: fear of legal liability in antibiotic prescribing/advising on antibiotic prescription; defensive behaviours in antibiotic prescribing; and defensive behaviours in advising. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify factors significantly associated with each of the three variables. Results Eight hundred and thirty individuals from 74 countries participated. Only 0.4% (3/779) had any kind of condemnation for malpractice related to antibiotic prescription. Concerning the fear of liability, 21.2% (164/774) of respondents said they never worried, 45.1% (349/774) sometimes worried and 28.6% (221/774) frequently worried when prescribing/advising on antibiotic prescription. Being female, younger than or equal to 35 years and aware of previous cases of litigation were independently associated with fear. Most respondents (85.0%, 525/618) reported some defensive behaviour in antibiotic prescribing. These behaviours were independently associated with being younger than or equal to 35 years and sometimes or often worried about liability. Similarly, 76.4% (505/661) reported defensive behaviours in advising. These behaviours were associated with being sometimes or often worried about liability. The preferred measures to reduce fear and defensive behaviours were having local guidelines and sharing decisions through teamwork. Conclusions A significant proportion of specialists in ID and CM reported some form of defensive behaviour in prescribing or advising to prescribe antibiotics. Defensive medicine should be considered when implementing antibiotic stewardship programmes.

Metrics for quantifying antibiotic use in the hospital setting: results from a systematic review and international multidisciplinary consensus procedure

Abstract Background Quantifying antibiotic use is an essential element of antibiotic stewardship since it allows comparison between different settings and time windows, and measurement of the impact of interventions. However, quantity metrics (QMs) and methods have not been standardized. Objectives To propose a set of QMs for antibiotic use in inpatients (IQMs) that are accepted globally by professionals in a range of disciplines. The study was conducted within the Driving Reinvestment in Research and Development and Responsible Antibiotic Use (DRIVE-AB) project. Methods A systematic literature review using MEDLINE identified articles on measuring inpatient antibiotic use, published up to 29 January 2015. A consensually selected list of national and international web sites was screened for additional IQMs. IQMs were classified according to the type of numerator used and presented to a multidisciplinary panel of stakeholders. A RAND-modified Delphi consensus procedure, which consisted of two online questionnaires and a face-to-face meeting, was performed. Results The systematic literature review and web site search identified 168 eligible articles from which an initial list of 20 IQMs, composed of 20 different numerators and associated denominators was developed. The consensus procedure resulted in a final set of 12 IQMs. Among this final set, DDDs per 100(0) patient-days and days of therapy per patient-days were most frequently found in the review. The panel recommended that antibiotic use should be expressed in at least two metrics simultaneously. Conclusions Our consensus procedure identified a set of IQMs that we propose as an evidence-based global standard.

Ensuring antibiotic development, equitable availability and responsible use of effective antibiotics: recommendations for multisectoral action

Antibiotic resistance is a growing threat to global public health. The World Health Organizations Global Action Plan on Antimicrobial Resistance recommends engaging multisectoral stakeholders to tackle the issue. However, so far, few studies have addressed barriers to antibiotic development, equitable availability, and responsible antibiotic use from the perspective of stakeholders outside healthcare facilities or patient communities: the so-called third-party stakeholders. Third-party stakeholders include, inter alia, governments, regulatory agencies, and professionals working in antibiotic research and development and medical ethics. This viewpoint provides an overview of barriers to antibiotic development, equitable availability of effective antibiotics, and the responsible use of antibiotics. The barriers were identified in an exploratory, qualitative interview study with an illustrative sample of 12 third-party stakeholders. Recommendations to lift these barriers are presented, together with examples of recently-made progress. The recommendations should guide future antibiotic policies and multisectoral policy action.