| 1. |
- Helou, R. , I, et al.
(författare)
-
Study protocol for an international, multicentre stepped-wedge cluster randomised trial to evaluate the impact of a digital antimicrobial stewardship smartphone application
- 2020
-
Ingår i: BMJ Open. - : BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP. - 2044-6055. ; 10:6
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- IntroductionWith the widespread use of electronic health records and handheld electronic devices in hospitals, informatics-based antimicrobial stewardship interventions hold great promise as tools to promote appropriate antimicrobial drug prescribing. However, more research is needed to evaluate their optimal design and impact on quantity and quality of antimicrobial prescribing.Methods and analysisUse of smartphone-based digital stewardship applications (apps) with local guideline directed empirical antimicrobial use by physicians will be compared with antimicrobial prescription as per usual as primary outcome in three hospitals in the Netherlands, Sweden and Switzerland. Secondary outcomes will include antimicrobial use metrics, clinical and process outcomes. A multicentre stepped-wedge cluster randomised trial will randomise entities defined as wards or specialty regarding time of introduction of the intervention. We will include 36 hospital entities with seven measurement periods in which the primary outcome will be measured in 15 participating patients per time period per cluster. At participating wards, patients of at least 18 years of age using antimicrobials will be included. After a baseline period of 2-week measurements, six periods of 4 weeks will follow in which the intervention is introduced in 6 wards (in three hospitals) until all 36 wards have implemented the intervention. Thereafter, we allow use of the app by everyone, and evaluate the sustainability of the app use 6 months later.Ethics and disseminationThis protocol has been approved by the institutional review board of each participating centre. Results will be disseminated via media, to healthcare professionals via professional training and meetings and to researchers via conferences and publications.Trial registration numberClinicalTrials.gov registry (NCT03793946). Stage; pre-results.
|
|
| 2. |
- Malmros, Karin, et al.
(författare)
-
Comparison of antibiotic treatment guidelines for urinary tract infections in 15 European countries : Results of an online survey
- 2019
-
Ingår i: International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents. - : Elsevier BV. - 0924-8579 .- 1872-7913. ; 54:4, s. 478-486
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Appropriate antibiotic use for urinary tract infections (UTIs) is important in order to provide effective and safe treatment while minimising the risk of antimicrobial resistance development. This survey was carried out to compare existing national guidelines for UTIs in Europe. Experts in 37 European countries were asked to participate. An electronic questionnaire was used to obtain information on treatment recommendations, factors considered important when setting guidelines, acceptable resistance rates for empirical therapy, evidence grading, and existing resistance surveillance for uropathogens. Treatment guidelines and antimicrobial susceptibility data were collected. In total, 22 experts (59%) responded to the survey. National guidelines were missing in four countries and data were incomplete in three cases. Fifteen national guidelines published between 2004 and 2017 were included in the analysis. Great variability was found between guidelines in the selection of antibiotics, dosing regimens and treatment duration. For example, 10 different antibiotics were recommended as first-line therapy for uncomplicated cystitis. National surveillance data on antimicrobial susceptibility of uropathogens were available in 13 of 15 countries. Resistance epidemiology could not explain the observed differences between guidelines, and comparison of resistance rates was hampered by variations in methods. This study revealed major differences in treatment guidelines for UTIs within Europe, indicating that there are opportunities for improvement. More clinical research and a more systematic and stratified approach to resistance surveillance, including also antibiotics that are currently not available in all countries, is needed.
|
|
