Search

Item does not contain fulltext 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.

The global public health threat of antibiotic-resistant infections as well as the lack of new treatments in clinical development is a critical issue. Reasons for this include diminished commercial incentives for pharmaceutical companies to develop new antibiotics, which part-reflects a shift in antibiotic marketing paradigm from broad deployment to targeted therapy in relatively small patient populations. Such changes are encouraged by antimicrobial stewardship (AMS). Other factors include a lack of recognition in the traditional assessment of new antibiotics by regulators, health technology assessors and payers of the broad range of benefits of new agents, particularly their value to health care, economies and society. Recognising the seriousness of the situation, there have been recent changes and proposals by regulators for modification of the assessment process to accommodate a broader range of acceptable data supporting new drug applications. There is also increasing recognition by some payers of the societal benefit of new antibiotics and the need for financial incentives for those developing high-priority antibiotics. However, progress is slow, with recent publications focusing on industry and strategic perspectives rather than clinical implications. In this opinion piece, we therefore focus on clinicians and the practical steps they can take to drive and contribute to increasing awareness and understanding of the value of antibiotics. This includes identifying and gathering appropriate alternative data sources, educating on AMS and prescribing habits, and contributing to international antibiotic susceptibility surveillance models.

In 2008, the Scottish Management of Antimicrobial Resistance Action Plan (ScotMARAP) was published by the Scottish Government. One of the key actions was initiation of the Scottish Antimicrobial Prescribing Group (SAPG), hosted within the Scottish Medicines Consortium, to take forward national implementation of the key recommendations of this action plan. The primary objective of SAPG is to co-ordinate and deliver a national framework or programme of work for antimicrobial stewardship. This programme, led by SAPG, is delivered by NHS National Services Scotland (Health Protection Scotland and Information Services Division), NHS Quality Improvement Scotland, and NHS National Education Scotland as well as NHS board Antimicrobial Management Teams. Between 2008 and 2010, SAPG has achieved a number of early successes, which are the subject of this review: (i) through measures to optimise prescribing in hospital and primary care, combined with infection prevention measures, SAPG has contributed significantly to reducing Clostridium difficile infection rates in Scotland; (ii) there has been engagement of all key stakeholders at local and national levels to ensure an integrated approach to antimicrobial stewardship within the wider healthcare-associated infection agenda; (iii) development and implementation of data management systems to support quality improvement; (iv) development of training materials on antimicrobial stewardship for healthcare professionals; and (v) improving clinical management of infections (e.g. community-acquired pneumonia) through quality improvement methodology. The early successes achieved by SAPG demonstrate that this delivery model is effective and provides the leadership and focus required to implement antimicrobial stewardship to improve antimicrobial prescribing and infection management across NHS Scotland.

A retrospective analysis of data from patients receiving daptomycin as outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) within the European Cubicin Outcomes Registry and Experience (EU-CORE(SM)) was performed. Of 4592 enrolled patients in 15 countries, 550 (12%) received daptomycin OPAT. Of these, 149 (27%) received daptomycin without hospital admission, 84% had significant underlying diseases and 44% were ≥65 years of age. Most frequently treated infections were complicated skin and soft-tissue infections (28%), osteomyelitis (17%), foreign body/prosthetic infections (15%) and endocarditis (14%). In patients with culture results available, Staphylococcus aureus and coagulase-negative staphylococci were the most commonly isolated primary pathogens [n = 218 (46%) and n = 102 (21%), respectively]. Daptomycin was typically used at doses of 6 mg/kg (n = 210; 38%) and 4 mg/kg (n = 160; 29%), with concomitant antibiotics used in 41%. The median treatment duration was 22 days (range 1-300 days), with a median of 13 OPAT days (range 1-290 days). Overall clinical success was observed in 89%, with high success rates across the wide range of infections, including those caused by meticillin-resistant and meticillin-susceptible S. aureus (88% and 90%, respectively). Daptomycin exhibited a favourable safety profile; 3.1% of patients discontinued treatment owing to an adverse event. These data demonstrate that daptomycin is effective and well tolerated in the treatment of a wide range of Gram-positive infections in the outpatient setting. Ease of administration of daptomycin, via a daily 2-min injection, and its efficacy and safety combine to make it an attractive treatment option for OPAT.