Managing antibiotic shortages: lessons from EAHP and ECDC surveys

AIMS AND OBJECTIVE

To compare antibiotic shortages in Europe between 2013 and 2020 and the views of hospital pharmacists on overcoming shortages via antimicrobial stewardship.

METHODS

A series of European Association of Hospital Pharmacists (EAHP) surveys on medicine shortages, including a survey on the future crisis preparedness of hospital pharmacies, conducted between 2013 and 2020 were compared for the type of antibiotic shortages and respective mitigation strategy. These were analysed taking into account hospital pharmacists' views on antibiotics provided in the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) survey on healthcare professionals' knowledge, attitudes and behaviours about antibiotics, antibiotic use and antibiotic resistance from 2018.

RESULTS

Since 2013 there has frequently been a shortage of antibiotics in European hospitals. In 2014, 67% (347/521) of hospital pharmacists experienced shortages of antimicrobials compared with 77% (1032/1348) in 2018, 63% (1158/1837) in 2019 and 37% (539/1466) in 2020. More than 80% of hospital pharmacists managed antibiotic shortages through substitution in 2014 (284/336) and 2018 (786/946), while this percentage was 40% (63/158) and 42% (620/1466) in 2019 and 2020, respectively. Although 72% (870/1204) of hospital pharmacists received information on how to avoid inappropriate antibiotic prescribing, dispensing and administration, only 37% (450/1204) changed their views and 28% (338/1204) changed their practice in steering antimicrobial treatment.

CONCLUSION

Antibiotic shortages affect proper antimicrobial stewardship because of limited appropriate alternatives, taking into account patients' clinical condition and type of infection. While substitution remains a leading mitigating tool for antibiotic shortages, it carries numerous risks and the potential for antimicrobial resistance and suboptimal health outcomes.

Clinical use of a new frameless optical neuronavigation system for brain biopsies: 10 cases (2013-2020)

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the retrospective study was to describe the brain biopsy procedure using a new frameless optical neuronavigation system and to report diagnostic yield and complications associated with the procedure.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The medical records for all dogs with forebrain lesions that underwent brain biopsy with a frameless optical neuronavigation system in a single referral hospital between 2013 and 2020 were retrospectively analysed. Following data were collected: signalment, neurological signs, diagnostic findings, number of brain biopsy samples, sampled region, complications, duration of hospitalisation, whether the samples were diagnostic and histopathological diagnoses. The device consists of a computer workstation with navigation software, an infrared camera, patient tracker and reflective instruments. The biopsy needle was equipped with reflective spheres, so the surgeon could see the position of the needle during sampling the intracranial lesion free handed through a mini-burr hole.

RESULTS

Ten dogs were included. Absolute diagnostic yield based on specific histopathological diagnosis was 73.9%. Three dogs had immune-mediated necrotizing encephalitis, two dogs showed a necrotizing leukoencephalitis and two dogs a meningoencephalitis of unknown origin. In two dogs, the brain specimen showed unspecific changes. In one dog, the samples were non-diagnostic. Seven dogs showed no neurological deterioration, one dog mild temporary ataxia and two dogs died within 36 hours post brain biopsy.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

In these 10 dogs, the frameless optical neuronavigation system employed was useful to gain diagnostic brain biopsy samples. Considering the mortality rate observed, further studies are needed to confirm the safety of this procedure and prove its actual clinical effectiveness.

Lessons learnt from the COVID-19 pandemic: results of EAHP survey on the future crisis preparedness of hospital pharmacies

Aim

The present survey aimed to collect information on the lessons learnt from the COVID-19 pandemic by hospital pharmacists. It focused on the shortages of health goods and the experiences of hospitals during the first phase of the crisis.

Methods

A 17-question survey was conducted by EAHP, looking at the experiences of hospital pharmacists during the COVD-19 pandemic. The survey ran from 16 September to 23 December 2020. Statistical analysis included backward stepwise logistic regression (BSLR), Pearson’s χ² test, t-test and one-way ANOVA, as appropriate; p≤0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

1466 hospital pharmacists answered the survey fully. 58%, 63% and 69% of them experienced shortages in medicines, disinfectants and personal protective equipment (PPE), respectively. BSLR showed that being a COVID-19 dedicated hospital increased the risk of medicine shortages (OR 1.63, 95% CI 1.15 to 2.31) but the shortages of disinfectants and PPE were lower (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.88; OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.85). Being a specialised hospital reduced the odds of medicine shortages (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.88), while countries with a greater percentage of the population infected had increased odds for all three types of shortages (OR 1.16, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.23; OR 1.34, 95% CI 1.19 to 1.50; OR 1.21, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.35). The odds were also higher in answers submitted in September compared with December. The classes of medicines with highest reported shortages were anaesthetics, antibiotics and muscle relaxants. The main entities that provided support were the national competent authorities and manufacturers.

Conclusion

Medicine shortages affected the work of hospital pharmacists during the early stages of the pandemic. The features of the crisis and the feedback described in this survey can provide interesting insights for a more resilient healthcare framework in the future.