Search

Delivery of parenteral antimicrobials in non-inpatient settings (DPANS) may be through a dedicated outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) service, co-ordinated by hospital- or community-based specialised teams, or via an infusion service involving community-based health professionals (nurses, general practitioners) without centralised hospital oversight, or through ad hoc arrangements. DPANS varies among countries. Our objective was to describe how DPANS is organised at a national level in European countries. A survey (65-item self-administered questionnaire) was conducted from February-June 2019 among infection specialists in 34 European countries on behalf of the ESCMID Study Group for Antimicrobial Stewardship (ESGAP) and the British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy (BSAC) OPAT initiative. Most countries (28/34; 82.4%) participated in the survey. DPANS was available in almost all (27/28; 96.4%) responding countries. DPANS was predominantly provided either via specialised OPAT services (17/28; 60.7%) or via infusion services (16/28; 57.1%), with 11 countries (39.3%) providing both services. A formal OPAT team structure with specifically trained staff was reported in only six countries (6/17; 35.3%). Some countries (4/28; 14.3%) had no structured services but practiced DPANS via ad hoc arrangements. The costs of all stages of the process were covered for patients managed by specialised OPAT/infusion services, either completely, partially or for specific patient groups in the majority (20/28; 71.4%) of countries. The main barriers to implement OPAT/infusion services were lack of organisational structure or guidelines. In conclusion, DPANS with respect to availability and organisation is highly heterogeneous in Europe. National/European guidelines may help improve and standardise DPANS., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd and International Society of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. All rights reserved.)

This study aimed to evaluate risk factors for 30-day mortality among hospitalised patients with Pseudomonas aeruginosa bacteraemia, a highly fatal condition. A retrospective study was conducted between 1 January 2009 and 31 October 2015 in 25 centres (9 countries) including 2396 patients. Univariable and multivariable analyses of risk factors were conducted for the entire cohort and for patients surviving ≥48 h. A propensity score for predictors of appropriate empirical therapy was introduced into the analysis. Of the 2396 patients, 636 (26.5%) died within 30 days. Significant predictors (odds ratio and 95% confidence interval) of mortality in the multivariable analysis included patient-related factors: age (1.02, 1.01-1.03); female sex (1.34, 1.03-1.77); bedridden functional capacity (1.99, 1.24-3.21); recent hospitalisation (1.43, 1.07-1.92); concomitant corticosteroids (1.33, 1.02-1.73); and Charlson comorbidity index (1.05, 1.01-1.93). Infection-related factors were multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas (1.52, 1.15-2.1), non-urinary source (2.44, 1.54-3.85) and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score (1.27, 1.18-1.36). Inappropriate empirical therapy was not associated with increased mortality (0.81, 0.49-1.33). Among 2135 patients surviving ≥48 h, hospital-acquired infection (1.59, 1.21-2.09), baseline endotracheal tube (1.63, 1.13-2.36) and ICU admission (1.53, 1.02-2.28) were additional risk factors. Risk factors for mortality among patients with P. aeruginosa were mostly irreversible. Early appropriate empirical therapy was not associated with reduced mortality. Further research should be conducted to explore subgroups that may not benefit from broad-spectrum antipseudomonal empirical therapy. Efforts should focus on prevention of infection, mainly hospital-acquired infection and multidrug-resistant pseudomonal infection., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

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., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The World Health Organization Essential Medicines List (WHO-EML) includes 'access' antibiotics, judged essential to treat common infections. The European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Study Group for Antimicrobial Stewardship defined a list of 'forgotten' antibiotics, some old and often off-patent antibiotics, which have particular value for specific indications., Objective: To investigate which WHO-EML 'access' and 'forgotten' antibiotics are approved at national level in a sample of low- to middle-income countries (LMICs)., Methods: The Scientific Committee used a consensus procedure to select 26 WHO-EML 'access' and 15 'forgotten' antibiotics. Paediatric formulations were explored for 14 antibiotics. An internet-based questionnaire was circulated to 40 LMIC representatives. Antibiotics were defined as approved if an official drug regulatory agency and/or the national ministry of health licensed their use, making them, at least theoretically, available on the market., Results: Twenty-eight LMICs (11 in Africa, 11 in Asia and six in America) were surveyed. Nine WHO-EML 'access' antibiotics (amoxicillin, ampicillin, benzylpenicillin, ceftriaxone, clarithromycin, ciprofloxacin, doxycycline, gentamicin and metronidazole) were approved in all countries, and all 26 'access' antibiotics were approved in more than two-thirds of countries. Among the 15 'forgotten' antibiotics, only one was approved in more than two-thirds of countries. The median number of approved antibiotics per country was 30 (interquartile range 23-35). Six of 14 paediatric formulations (amoxicillin, amoxicillin-clavulanic acid, oral antistaphylococcal penicillin, cotrimoxazole, erythromycin and metronidazole) were approved in more than two-thirds of countries., Conclusions: WHO-EML 'access' antibiotics and the most frequently used formulations for paediatrics were approved in the vast majority of the 28 surveyed LMICs. This was not the case for many of the 'forgotten' antibiotics, despite their important role, particularly in areas with high prevalence of multi-drug-resistant bacteria., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) is the cornerstone activity in the combat against antimicrobial resistance. In order to ensure sustainable deployment and development of AMS, a strategic and regulatory framework needs to be provided by national healthcare authorities. Experts from 32 European countries, Israel and Turkey were invited to participate in a cross-sectional internet-based survey from October 2016 to May 2017 on the legal framework and mandatory components (structures, activities) of AMS in hospitals, i.e. components required by legislation or regulations. We collected data from 25 countries and two regions (in countries with federal health administration). Laws regulating AMS existed in seven countries and one region. Other health ministry regulations were applicable in 13 countries and one region. National strategies and/or action plans approved by ministries of health were in place in 13 countries and one region. Conversely, five countries and one region had no regulation of AMS in hospitals. Funding for AMS in hospitals was provided in five countries and one region. Eight countries and one region reported mandatory AMS structures and activities complying with the Transatlantic Taskforce on Antimicrobial Resistance (TATFAR) structure, policy and practice indicators. In 10/27 cases, however, the mandatory AMS activities were not being fully carried out. The survey showed heterogeneous legal frameworks for AMS in hospitals, and in many countries it was even lacking. The situation may be critical in countries with poor control of antimicrobial use and resistance. Recent international initiatives calling on policy-makers to address the threat of antimicrobial resistance could yield improvement., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. and International Society of Chemotherapy. All rights reserved.)

Bloodstream infections (BSIs) are common, however international guidelines are available only for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bacteraemia and candidaemia. This international ESCMID cross-sectional survey, open from December 2016 to February 2017, explored the management of BSIs by infection specialists. All infection specialists (senior or trainees) giving at least weekly advice on positive blood cultures could participate. Their practices were evaluated using six clinical vignettes presenting uncomplicated BSI cases. A total of 616 professionals from 56 countries participated [333/616 (54%) infectious diseases specialists, 188/616 (31%) clinical microbiologists], of whom 76% (468/616) were members of an antimicrobial stewardship team. Large variations in practice were noted, in particular for the Escherichia coli, Enterococcus faecalis and Pseudomonas aeruginosa vignettes. Echocardiography was considered standard of care by 81% (373/459) of participants for MRSA, 78% (400/510) for methicillin-susceptible S. aureus and 60% (236/395) for Candida albicans. Antimicrobial combination therapy was recommended by 2% (8/360) of respondents for C. albicans, 11% (43/378) for E. coli, 27% (114/420) for MRSA and 39% (155/393) for E. faecalis. Intravenous-to-oral switch was considered in 68% (285/418) for MRSA, 79% (306/388) for E. faecalis, 72% (264/366) for P. aeruginosa and 75% (270/362) for C. albicans. In multivariable analysis, IDSA guideline-compliant practice was more frequent among participants belonging to an antimicrobial stewardship team (aOR = 1.7, P = 0.018 for the MRSA vignette; and aOR = 2.0, P = 0.008 for the candidaemia vignette). This survey showed large variations in practice among infection specialists. International guidelines on management of BSI are urgently needed., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. and International Society of Chemotherapy. All rights reserved.)

Selective reporting of antibiotic susceptibility test (AST) results is a potential intervention for laboratory-based antibiotic stewardship. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of AST reporting on the appropriateness of antibiotics selected by French general practitioners for urinary tract infections (UTIs). A randomised controlled case-vignette study in a region of northeast France surveyed general practitioners between July and October 2015 on treatment of four clinical cases of community-acquired Escherichia coli UTIs (two cases of complicated cystitis, one of acute pyelonephritis and one male UTI). In Group A, selective reporting of AST results was used for the first two cases and complete reporting for the other two cases; these were reversed in Group B. The overall participation rate was 131/198 (66.2%). Provision of selective AST results significantly increased the rate of adherence to national guidelines for first-line antibiotic treatment in Cases 1, 3 and 4 by 22.4% (55.2% vs. 32.8%, P = 0.01), 67.5% (75.0% vs. 7.5%, P <0.001) and 36.3% (45.3% vs. 9.0%, P <0.001), respectively. The improvement in compliance was not significant for Case 2. Prescriptions of amoxicillin-clavulanic acid, fluoroquinolones and cephalosporins decreased by 25.0% to 45.0%, depending on the clinical vignette. Most (106/131, 81.0%) participants favoured the routine use of selective reporting of AST results. In conclusion, selective reporting of AST results seems to improve antibiotic prescribing practices in primary care, and may be considered a key element of antimicrobial stewardship programmes., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. and International Society of Chemotherapy. All rights reserved.)

Selective reporting of antibiotic susceptibility test (AST) results is one possible laboratory-based antibiotic stewardship intervention. The primary aim of this study was to identify where and how selective reporting of AST results is implemented in Europe both in inpatient and in outpatient settings. An ESCMID cross-sectional, self-administered, internet-based survey was conducted among all EUCIC (European Committee on Infection Control) or EUCAST (European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing) national representatives in Europe and Israel. Of 38 countries, 36 chose to participate in the survey. Selective reporting of AST results was implemented in 11/36 countries (31%), was partially implemented in 4/36 (11%) and was limited to local initiatives or was not adopted in 21/36 (58%). It was endorsed as standard of care by health authorities in only three countries. The organisation of selective reporting was everywhere discretionally managed by each laboratory, with a pronounced intra- and inter-country variability. The most frequent application was in uncomplicated community-acquired infections, particularly urinary tract and skin and soft-tissue infections. The list of reported antibiotics ranged from a few first-line options, to longer reports where only last-resort antibiotics were hidden. Several barriers to implementation were reported, mainly lack of guidelines, poor system support, insufficient resources, and lack of professionals' capability. In conclusion, selective reporting of AST results is poorly implemented in Europe and is applied with a huge heterogeneity of practices. Development of an international framework, based on existing initiatives and identified barriers, could favour its dissemination as one important element of antibiotic stewardship programmes., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. and International Society of Chemotherapy. All rights reserved.)

The objective of this study was to update a 2011 survey, conducted on behalf of the ESCMID Study Group for Antibiotic Policies (ESGAP), studying the availability of old but clinically useful antibiotics in North America, Europe and Australia. This follow-up survey was performed in 2015 in 40 countries among specialists from the pharmaceutical, infectious diseases and microbiology sectors in North America, Europe and Australia in order to assess the availability through usual marketing processes of 36 systemic antibiotics (addition of 3 antibiotics compared with the 2011 survey) selected for their ability to treat infections caused by resistant bacteria and their unique value for specific criteria. The questionnaire was sent by e-mail to national contacts belonging to ESGAP and ReAct networks. In all, 39 of the 40 countries participated in this survey. The number of available antibiotics differed considerably from one drug to another as well as from one country to another (e.g. 7 antibiotics available in Estonia, 24 in France). Overall, 25/36 selected antibiotics were marketed in 20/39 countries or less. From 2011 to 2015 (data available for both periods in 37 countries for 33 antibiotics), the number of available selected antibiotics increased in 13 countries and decreased in 17. In conclusion, despite the ongoing bacterial resistance crisis, the situation regarding the availability of 'forgotten antibiotics' has worsened since 2011. Urgent measures are needed to ensure better availability of these antibiotics on a global scale as a conservation measure to ensure sustainable and responsible use of antibiotics., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier B.V. and International Society of Chemotherapy. All rights reserved.)