Search

Background: Our aim in this study was to develop quality indicators (QIs) for outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) care that can be used as metrics for quality assessment and improvement., Methods: A RAND-modified Delphi procedure was used to develop a set of QIs. Recommendations on appropriate OPAT care in adults were retrieved from the literature using a systematic review and translated into potential QIs. These QIs were appraised and prioritized by a multidisciplinary panel of international OPAT experts in 2 questionnaire rounds combined with a meeting between rounds., Results: The procedure resulted in 33 OPAT-specific recommendations. The following QIs that describe recommended OPAT care were prioritized by the expert panel: the presence of a structured OPAT program, a formal OPAT care team, a policy on patient selection criteria, and a treatment and monitoring plan; assessment for OPAT should be performed by the OPAT team; patients and family should be informed about OPAT; there should be a mechanism in place for urgent discussion and review of emergent clinical problems, and a system in place for rapid communication; laboratory results should be delivered to physicians within 24 hours; and the OPAT team should document clinical response to antimicrobial management, document adverse events, and monitor QIs for OPAT care and make these data available., Conclusions: We systematically developed a set of 33 QIs for optimal OPAT care, of which 12 were prioritized by the expert panel. These QIs can be used to assess and improve the quality of care provided by OPAT teams., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America.)

Objectives: Current outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) guidelines recommend delivering patient-centred care. However, little is known about what patients define as good quality of OPAT care and what their needs and preferences are.The aim of this qualitative study is to explore the patients' perspective on high-quality care, and to explore what patient-centred care means to adult OPAT patients., Design and Setting: This is an explorative, descriptive study using qualitative methods. We conducted focus group interviews with 16 adult patients (5 female, 11 male) from 3 different hospitals, who received OPAT and 2 individual semistructured interviews with their informal caregivers in the Netherlands. We used purposive sampling to ensure diversity of participants. We used the eight Picker principles of patient-centredness to guide data collection and analysis., Results: Participants reported several elements considered as important for patient-centred OPAT care, like patient involvement in the decision-making process, a responsible OPAT lead, intensive collaboration between all disciplines involved, information provision and adherence to hygiene guidelines. Two central dimensions emerged as essential constituents of patient-centred OPAT care: freedom and safety. Both are heavily influenced by the behaviours of healthcare professionals and by organisational aspects beyond the direct influence of these professionals., Conclusion: This study provides insights into the needs and preferences of adult patients who receive OPAT care. Future interventions directed at the improvement of patient-centredness of OPAT care should focus on elements that enhance patients' feelings of freedom and safety., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2018. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Timely switch from intravenous (iv) antibiotics to oral therapy is a key component of antimicrobial stewardship programs in order to improve patient safety, promote early discharge and reduce costs. We have introduced a time-efficient and easily implementable intervention that relies on a computerized trigger tool, which identifies patients who are candidates for an iv to oral antibiotic switch. Methods: The intervention was introduced on all internal medicine wards in a teaching hospital. Patients were automatically identified by an electronic trigger tool when parenteral antibiotics were used for >48 h and clinical or pharmacological data did not preclude switch therapy. A weekly educational session was introduced to alert the physicians on the intervention wards. The intervention wards were compared with control wards, which included all other hospital wards. An interrupted time-series analysis was performed to compare the pre-intervention period with the post-intervention period using '% of i.v. prescriptions >72 h' and 'median duration of iv therapy per prescription' as outcomes. We performed a detailed prospective evaluation on a subset of 244 prescriptions to evaluate the efficacy and appropriateness of the intervention. Results: The number of intravenous prescriptions longer than 72 h was reduced by 19% in the intervention group (n = 1519) (p < 0.01) and the median duration of iv antibiotics was reduced with 0.8 days (p = <0.05). Compared to the control group (n = 4366) the intervention was responsible for an additional decrease of 13% (p < 0.05) in prolonged prescriptions. The detailed prospective evaluation of a subgroup of patients showed that adherence to the electronic reminder was 72%. Conclusions: An electronic trigger tool combined with a weekly educational session was effective in reducing the duration of intravenous antimicrobial therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Dutch Working Party on Antibiotic Policy is developing a national antimicrobial stewardship registry. This registry will report both the quality of antibiotic use in hospitals in the Netherlands and the stewardship activities employed. It is currently unclear which aspects of the quality of antibiotic use are monitored by antimicrobial stewardship teams (A-teams) and can be used as indicators for the stewardship registry. In this pilot study we aimed to determine which stewardship objectives are eligible for the envisioned registry.Methods: We performed an observational pilot study among five Dutch hospitals. We assessed which of the 14 validated stewardship objectives (11 process of care recommendations and 3 structure of care recommendations) the A-teams monitored and documented in individual patients. They provided, where possible, data to compute quality indicator (QI) performance scores in line with recently developed QIs to measure appropriate antibiotic use in hospitalized adults for the period of January 2015 through December 2015 RESULTS: All hospitals had a local antibiotic guideline describing recommended antimicrobial use. All A-teams monitored the performance of bedside consultations in Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia and the prescription of restricted antimicrobials. Documentation and reporting were the best for the use of restricted antimicrobials: 80% of the A-teams could report data. Lack of time and the absence of an electronic medical record system enabling documentation during the daily work flow were the main barriers hindering documentation and reporting.Conclusions: Five out of 11 stewardship objectives were actively monitored by A-teams. Without extra effort, 4 A-teams could report on the quality of use of restricted antibiotics. Therefore, this aspect of antibiotic use should be the starting point of the national antimicrobial stewardship registry. Our registry is expected to become a powerful tool to evaluate progress and impact of antimicrobial stewardship programs in hospitals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]