This preprint is under consideration at BMC Infectious Diseases. A preprint is a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Learn more about In Review
Research article
Ravena Melo Ribeiro da Silva
Federal University of Sergipe: Universidade Federal de Sergipe
Corresponding Author
ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0923-7704
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
Background: Antimicrobials are among the most prescribed drugs in ICUs, where the use of these drugs is approximately 10 times greater than that of other wards. Even so, it is observed that between 30 to 60% of antimicrobial prescriptions performed in these units are unnecessary or inadequate. Thus, surveillance of antimicrobial prescription is a first and essential step to identify potential overuse or misuse, which could be the target of interventions for antimicrobial administration.
Methods: This is an observational, analytical, and prospective study conducted in two adult intensive care units (ICU 1 = surgical and ICU 2 = clinic), with 27 beds each. The study period was divided into pre-intervention (January to June 2019) and post-intervention (July to December 2019).
Results: Overall, in the pre- and post-intervention period, 91.4% and 90.0%, respectively, of patients received at least one antimicrobial agent. The most frequently prescribed antimicrobial classes were carbapenems (PRE = 26.0% vs POST = 24.9%; p = 0.245) followed by glycopeptides (PRE = 21.0% vs POST = 18.6%; p = 0.056). Overall, there was a significant reduction in the duration of therapy (PRE = 727 LOT / 1000pd vs POST = 680 LOT / 1000pd; p = 0.028). The highest rates regarding the time of use of antimicrobials were observed for carbapenems, followed by glycopeptides, with significant reductions in the time of exposure of glycopeptides and polymyxin B, and significant increases for penicillins, and tigecycline.
Conclusions: In general, the intervention of infectious diseases specialistsin intensive care units had a limited impact on the results evaluated. This may be due to the short period analyzed. Therefore, it is important to monitor the impact of these changes in the long term, drawing a more accurate assessment of the effectiveness of an intervention, with the implementation of active feedback.
Keywords
Anti-Infective Agents, Antimicrobial Stewardship, Drug Resistance, Intensive Care Units
Loading...
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
Peer Review Timeline
CURRENT STATUS: Under Review
Version 1
Posted 09 Mar, 2021
No community comments so far
Editor assigned
On 21 Feb, 2021
Editorial decision: Reject before sending to peer reviewers
On 21 Feb, 2021
Submission checks complete
On 21 Feb, 2021
Editor invited
On 21 Feb, 2021
First submitted
On 19 Jan, 2021
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
Subject Areas
Infectious Diseases
Learn more about our company.
This preprint is under consideration at BMC Infectious Diseases. A preprint is a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Learn more about In Review
Research article
Ravena Melo Ribeiro da Silva
Federal University of Sergipe: Universidade Federal de Sergipe
Corresponding Author
ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0923-7704
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
Peer Review Timeline
CURRENT STATUS: Under Review
Version 1
Posted 09 Mar, 2021
No community comments so far
Editor assigned
On 21 Feb, 2021
Editorial decision: Reject before sending to peer reviewers
On 21 Feb, 2021
Submission checks complete
On 21 Feb, 2021
Editor invited
On 21 Feb, 2021
First submitted
On 19 Jan, 2021
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
Subject Areas
Infectious Diseases
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
Background: Antimicrobials are among the most prescribed drugs in ICUs, where the use of these drugs is approximately 10 times greater than that of other wards. Even so, it is observed that between 30 to 60% of antimicrobial prescriptions performed in these units are unnecessary or inadequate. Thus, surveillance of antimicrobial prescription is a first and essential step to identify potential overuse or misuse, which could be the target of interventions for antimicrobial administration.
Methods: This is an observational, analytical, and prospective study conducted in two adult intensive care units (ICU 1 = surgical and ICU 2 = clinic), with 27 beds each. The study period was divided into pre-intervention (January to June 2019) and post-intervention (July to December 2019).
Results: Overall, in the pre- and post-intervention period, 91.4% and 90.0%, respectively, of patients received at least one antimicrobial agent. The most frequently prescribed antimicrobial classes were carbapenems (PRE = 26.0% vs POST = 24.9%; p = 0.245) followed by glycopeptides (PRE = 21.0% vs POST = 18.6%; p = 0.056). Overall, there was a significant reduction in the duration of therapy (PRE = 727 LOT / 1000pd vs POST = 680 LOT / 1000pd; p = 0.028). The highest rates regarding the time of use of antimicrobials were observed for carbapenems, followed by glycopeptides, with significant reductions in the time of exposure of glycopeptides and polymyxin B, and significant increases for penicillins, and tigecycline.
Conclusions: In general, the intervention of infectious diseases specialistsin intensive care units had a limited impact on the results evaluated. This may be due to the short period analyzed. Therefore, it is important to monitor the impact of these changes in the long term, drawing a more accurate assessment of the effectiveness of an intervention, with the implementation of active feedback.
Loading...