Conduite rationnelle de l’antibioprophylaxie : revue systématique en chirurgie carcinologique ORL

WHO's essential medicines and AWaRe: recommendations on first- and second-choice antibiotics for empiric treatment of clinical infections

The WHO Model List of Essential Medicines (EML) prioritizes medicines that have significant global public health value. The EML can also deliver important messages on appropriate medicine use. Since 2017, in response to the growing challenge of antimicrobial resistance, antibiotics on the EML have been reviewed and categorized into three groups: Access, Watch, and Reserve, leading to a new categorization called AWaRe. These categories were developed taking into account the impact of different antibiotics and classes on antimicrobial resistance and the implications for their appropriate use. The 2023 AWaRe classification provides empirical guidance on 41 essential antibiotics for over 30 clinical infections targeting both the primary health care and hospital facility setting. A further 257 antibiotics not included on the EML have been allocated an AWaRe group for stewardship and monitoring purposes. This article describes the development of AWaRe, focussing on the clinical evidence base that guided the selection of Access, Watch, or Reserve antibiotics as first and second choices for each infection. The overarching objective was to offer a tool for optimizing the quality of global antibiotic prescribing and reduce inappropriate use by encouraging the use of Access antibiotics (or no antibiotics) where appropriate. This clinical evidence evaluation and subsequent EML recommendations are the basis for the AWaRe antibiotic book and related smartphone applications. By providing guidance on antibiotic prioritization, AWaRe aims to facilitate the revision of national lists of essential medicines, update national prescribing guidelines, and supervise antibiotic use. Adherence to AWaRe would extend the effectiveness of current antibiotics while helping countries expand access to these life-saving medicines for the benefit of current and future patients, health professionals, and the environment.

Application of DMAIC Cycle and Modeling as Tools for Health Technology Assessment in a University Hospital

Background

The Health Technology Assessment (HTA) is used to evaluate health services, manage healthcare processes more efficiently, and compare medical technologies. The aim of this paper is to carry out an HTA study that compares two pharmacological therapies and provides the clinicians with two models to predict the length of hospital stay (LOS) of patients undergoing oral cavity cancer surgery on the bone tissue.

Methods

The six Sigma method was used as a tool of HTA; it is a technique of quality management and process improvement that combines the use of statistics with a five-step procedure: “Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve, Control” referred to in the acronym DMAIC. Subsequently, multiple linear regression has been used to create two models. Two groups of patients were analyzed: 45 were treated with ceftriaxone while 48 were treated with the combination of cefazolin and clindamycin.

Results

A reduction of the overall mean LOS of patients undergoing oral cavity cancer surgery on bone was observed of 40.9% in the group treated with ceftriaxone. Its reduction was observed in all the variables of the ceftriaxone group. The best results are obtained in younger patients (−54.1%) and in patients with low oral hygiene (−52.4%) treated. The regression results showed that the best LOS predictors for cefazolin/clindamycin are ASA score and flap while for ceftriaxone, in addition to these two, oral hygiene and lymphadenectomy are the best predictors. In addition, the adjusted R squared showed that the variables considered explain most of the variance of LOS.

Conclusion

SS methodology, used as an HTA tool, allowed us to understand the performance of the antibiotics and provided variables that mostly influence postoperative LOS. The obtained models can improve the outcome of patients, reducing the postoperative LOS and the relative costs, consequently increasing patient safety, and improving the quality of care provided.

Prospective comparison of perioperative antibiotic management protocols in oncological head and neck surgery

OBJECTIVES

The adequate perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis in head and neck cancer surgery is an important and easy applicable tool to decrease nosocomial morbidity and mortality by reducing the rate of infections. In the study a strictly perioperative antibiosis is compared with an extended postoperative prophylactic antibiosis. We aim to clarify the value of postoperative prophylactic antibiosis for the recovery and clinical course of patients.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In this prospective study 75 consecutive patients, who underwent major oncological head and neck surgery were included and divided in three groups, each containing 25 patients. The first group received peri- and postoperative antibiotic prophylaxis (POAP) from the day of operation until the fifth day postoperatively. The second group was treated with perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis (PEAP) only. The third group received perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis and increased local antiseptic care (PAPAC). General anamnestic data was collected, as well as duration of hospitalisation, stay on intensive care unit, rate and type of infections, surgical closure of the tracheostomy, and postoperative blood parameters.

RESULTS

There were no statistically significant differences in general diseases or extent of surgery between the groups. There were statistically significant fewer patients suffering from surgical site infections in subjects with POAP (n = 1) in comparison to PEAP (n = 9; p = 0.011) and PAPAC (n = 9; p = 0.011). In contrast, other nosocomial infections (pneumonia, urinary tract infection, sepsis) did not decrease under a prolonged antibiotic prophylaxis.

CONCLUSION

Based on findings of the study, we recommend an extended postoperative antibiotic prophylaxis for patients undergoing major oncological head and neck surgery.