Skip to content

Analysis of antibiotic prescription over 4 months, antimicrobial stewardship team project

Pdf

PDF Icon

European Statement

Clinical Pharmacy Services

Author(s)

Carlos José Cortés Sánchez, Josefina Giménez Castellanos, Mónica Abdilla Bonías, Arantxa Valdivia Piqueres, José María Gómez Portolés, Irene Toledo Guasp, Eva García Cortés

Why was it done?

Proper use of antimicrobials is essential to ensure their efficacy and minimize the emergence of resistance. The evaluation of antibiotic prescription in a district hospital can provide information about clinical practice, adherence to local protocols, and the possibility of addressing antimicrobial resistance issues.

What was done?

Review the appropriateness of antibiotic prescription according to local guidelines and protocols.

How was it done?

This is 4-month prospective observational study(May to August 2023) in a district hospital. A daily list of admitted patients on antibiotic treatment was obtained through OrionClinic® electronic prescription. Each patient was reviewed and discussed for appropriateness with antimicrobial stewardship team in a Microsoft-TEAMS© chat. The following data were recorded: registration date, patient identification, hospitalization unit, microbiological culture, treatment modality (prophylaxis, empirical, or targeted) and appropriateness using a Microsoft FORMS©.
Descriptive analysis expressed as number and percentage and relationships derived from registration: percentage of patients by hospitalization unit, treatment modality, and appropriateness. Percentage of patients on empirical treatment with microbiological culture. And appropriateness according to treatment modality.

What has been achieved?

A total of 172 patients were analysed, of which 83(48.25%) were surgical patients (orthopaedic surgery, general surgery, urology, gynaecology, otolaryngology), 64(37.2%) are from internal medicine,MIN, 17(9.9%) from intensive care unit,ICU, and 8(4.7%) from paediatrics,PED. Of the total of patients, 95(55.2%) had requested a microbiological culture. About 52(30.2%) patients were on prophylactic treatment, 103(59.9%) empirically, and 17(9.9%) on targeted treatment. In conclusion, 119(69.2%) antibiotic treatments were appropriate (prophylactic 26/50%, empiric 80/77.67% and targeted treatment 13/76.5%).
Breaking-down data by hospitalization unit and treatment, of the 83 surgical (49 prophylactic, 28 empirical, and 6 targeted) 47(56.6%) were appropriate. Among the 64 MIN patients(1 prophylactic, 56 empirical, and 7 targeted), 54(84.4%) were appropriate. In ICU of 17 patients(2 prophylactic, 12 empirical, and 3 targeted), 11(64.7%) were appropriate. In PED of 8 patients(7 empirical and 1 targeted), 7(87.5%) were appropriate. Of the total of patients on empirical treatment(103), in 28(27.2%) there isn’t microbiological sample.

What next?

This is a preliminary analysis of our hospital’s situation in order to assess where interventions are needed for those patients who are not appropriate. It also helps us identify the hospitalisation units in which it is more necessary to implement strategic non-imposing measures to improve antibiotic prescription.

Clinically digital program support for personalised dosing of vancomycin

European Statement

Clinical Pharmacy Services

Author(s)

Wei Wang, Hao Bai

Why was it done?

It depend on the pharmacokinetic (PK)/pharmacodynamic (PD) of vancomycin. Vancomycin can be described as a kinetic model with one compartment connected by a series of first-order kinetic rate processes. The mini programme uses two drug levels during the same dosing interval by the TDM to calculate the area under the curve (AUC) of vancomycin and integrated into patients’ condition and minimal inhibitory concentration of pathogen to provide an optimal dosing regimen of vancomycin.

What was done?

We designed and developed a mini programme support for personalised therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of vancomycin. This programme can be easily used in the WeChat by the mobile device.

How was it done?

The traditional vancomycin TDM strategy, which is guided by trough concentrations, has several limitations:
The recommended trough concentration range of 10-15mg/L assumes that the bacteria’s minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) for vancomycin is ≤1mg/L. However, with the drifting of vancomycin’s MIC values over recent years, this trough concentration has not been able to effectively guide patient prognosis, as has been confirmed by many clinical studies.
There are practical difficulties: for example, the 2009 IDSA guidelines clearly specify that the trough concentration of vancomycin should be sampled half an hour before the fifth dose. However, in reality, due to misunderstandings by nursing staff or excessive workload, sampling times often deviate from this guideline.
After the trough concentration has been determined, there are no explicit measures for dose adjustment. The 2009 IDSA guidelines do not provide recommendations on how to adjust subsequent doses based on trough concentrations.
A decade later, in 2020, the IDSA released new vancomycin TDM guidelines. These guidelines suggest moving away from the trough concentration TDM strategy for vancomycin, and instead recommend using an AUC-guided strategy, determined by two-point blood concentration monitoring of vancomycin.

What has been achieved?

Vancomycin follows first-order pharmacokinetics. To monitor the AUC of vancomycin, it is necessary to measure the serum vancomycin concentration at two steady-state points, then use Monte Carlo simulations and Bayesian software to calculate the AUC and adjust the dosage. This process requires a large number of calculations. Therefore, there is an urgent need for an auxiliary decision making system in clinical practice that can facilitate personalised dosing of vancomycin.

What next?

This mini programme has run above 1 year, providing personalised medicine service of vancomycin to hundreds of patients in China, guiding the precise and rational use of antimicrobial drugs , enhancing the effectiveness of vancomycin and reducing drug toxicity in clinical practice.

Stewardship initiative for COVID-19 monoclonal antibodies led by clinical pharmacists

European Statement

Clinical Pharmacy Services

Author(s)

Petra Rozsívalová, Věra Zdanovcová, Lenka Beková, Martina Maříková, Marcela Heislerová, Vladimír Koblížek, Petr Šmahel

Why was it done?

By implementing systematic monitoring in our institution, CPs ensure appropriate and safe use of unlicensed treatment available under Emergency Use Authorisation. The secondary goal is mandatory data input to national register and patient clinical outcome feedback to physicians and hospital management.

What was done?

It is vital to bring focus on appropriate use of COVID-19 monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) in high-risk population when safety and efficacy data are scarce. A team of clinical pharmacists (CPs) helped to set up process flow, monitor prescribing of mAbs and provide systematic follow-up on time course of symptoms reported by SARS-COV-2 positive outpatients since March 2021.

How was it done?

Ethics committee approval was obtained for monitoring of patients. Consented patient data are extracted from electronic prescribing system and patients score subjective symptoms using questionnaire on days 7, 29 and 90 after the infusion. The prescriber, indication criteria, infusion application day with regards to PCR positivity and symptom onset and vaccination status are recorded.

What has been achieved?

Currently our small dataset includes 59 bamlanivimab and 63 casirivimab/imdevimab patients. On average, mAbs are administered within 2 days of positive PCR test and 5 days of COVID-19 symptoms onset. Our patients report subjective improvement in symptoms by 7 days post infusion. None of our patients clinically deteriorated because of COVID-19. 100 % of mAbs administered are reported in the national database. In October 2021 we achieved that laboratory confirmed positive patients receive text message with infectionist contact to discuss eligibility for mAbs on 24/7 basis. CPs also implemented information leaflets on mAbs for patients with chronic conditions.

What next?

To date, there are no published descriptive data on real-life utilisation of COVID-19 mAbs in terms of patient characteristics, disease outcome and vaccination status. Our initiative shows na excellent opportunity for CPs to enhance timely and rational mAbs use.

×

EAHP Forum

All the EAHP team is working on providing a Forum that can help connect all the members in Conversations and Groups to talk about important matters for the European Hospital Pharmacist.

The Forum will be accessible for all the EAHP members, you don’t have to create a new account to browse and participate.

Conversations and groups

The Conversations will be moderated by our team to provide documents and relevant topics for the community.

The Groups will connect all members that share a category. Members who work on the same assocation, on the same hospital, that have the same role, etc.

Stay tuned for the realase of the forum. Soon on EAHP.