Policy Statement on Antimicrobial Stewardship by the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (SHEA), the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA), and the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society (PIDS)

Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology (Impact Factor: 4.18). 04/2012; 33(4):322-327. DOI: 10.1086/665010


Antimicrobial resistance has emerged as a significant healthcare quality and patient safety issue in the twenty-first century that, combined with a rapidly dwindling antimicrobial armamentarium, has resulted in a critical threat to the public health of the United States. Antimicrobial stewardship programs optimize antimicrobial use to achieve the best clinical outcomes while minimizing adverse events and limiting selective pressures that drive the emergence of resistance and may also reduce excessive costs attributable to suboptimal antimicrobial use. Therefore, antimicrobial stewardship must be a fiduciary responsibility for all healthcare institutions across the continuum of care. This position statement of the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America, the Infectious Diseases Society of America, and the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society of America outlines recommendations for the mandatory implementation of antimicrobial stewardship throughout health care, suggests process and outcome measures to monitor these interventions, and addresses deficiencies in education and research in this field as well as the lack of accurate data on antimicrobial use in the United States. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2012; 33(4): 322-327

1 Read
  • Annals of emergency medicine 11/2012; 62(1). DOI:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2012.09.002 · 4.68 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Introduction Increasing antimicrobial costs, reduced development of novel antimicrobials, and growing antimicrobial resistance necessitate judicious use of available agents. Antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) may improve antimicrobial use in intensive care units (ICUs). Our objective was to determine whether the introduction of an ASP in an ICU altered the decision to treat cultures from sterile sites compared with nonsterile sites (which may represent colonization or contamination). We also sought to determine whether ASP education improved documentation of antimicrobial use, including an explicit statement of antimicrobial regimen, indication, duration, and de-escalation. Methods We retrospectively analyzed consecutive patients with positive bacterial cultures admitted to a 16-bed medical-surgical ICU over 2-month periods before and after ASP introduction (April through May 2008 and 2009, respectively). We evaluated the antimicrobial treatment of positive sterile- versus nonsterile-site cultures, specified a priori. We reviewed patient charts for clinician documentation of three specific details regarding antimicrobials: an explicit statement of antimicrobial regimen/indication, duration, and de-escalation. We also analyzed cost and defined daily doses (DDDs) (a World Health Organization (WHO) standardized metric of use) before and after ASP. Results Patient demographic data between the pre-ASP (n = 139) and post-ASP (n = 130) periods were similar. No difference was found in the percentage of positive cultures from sterile sites between the pre-ASP period and post-ASP period (44.9% versus 40.2%; P = 0.401). A significant increase was noted in the treatment of sterile-site cultures after ASP (64% versus 83%; P = 0.01) and a reduction in the treatment of nonsterile-site cultures (71% versus 46%; P = 0.0002). These differences were statistically significant when treatment decisions were analyzed both at an individual patient level and at an individual culture level. Increased explicit antimicrobial regimen documentation was observed after ASP (26% versus 71%; P < 0.0001). Also observed were increases in formally documented stop dates (53% versus 71%; P < 0.0001), regimen de-escalation (15% versus 23%; P = 0.026), and an overall reduction in cost and mean DDDs after ASP implementation. Conclusions Introduction of an ASP in the ICU was associated with improved microbiologically targeted therapy based on sterile or nonsterile cultures and improved documentation of antimicrobial use in the medical record.
    Critical care (London, England) 11/2012; 16(6):R216. DOI:10.1186/cc11854 · 4.48 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Our prospective-audit-and-feedback antimicrobial stewardship (AS) program for hematology and oncology inpatients was switched from one led by dedicated clinicians to a rotating team of infectious diseases trainees in order to provide learning opportunities and attempt a "de-escalation" of specialist input towards a more protocol-driven implementation. However, process indicators including number of and compliance to recommendations fell significantly during the year, with accompanying increases in broad-spectrum antibiotic prescription. The trends were reversed only upon reverting to the original setup. Dedicated clinicians play a crucial role in AS programs involving immunocompromised patients. Structured training and adequate succession/contingency planning is critical for sustainability.
    11/2012; 1(1):36. DOI:10.1186/2047-2994-1-36
Show more