Specialty care delivery: bringing infectious disease expertise to the residents of a Veterans Affairs long-term care facility

Assessment of implementation strategies adopted for antimicrobial stewardship interventions in long-term care facilities: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The implementation of antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) interventions in long-term care facilities (LTCFs) is influenced by multi-level factors (resident, organizational, and external) making their effectiveness sensitive to the implementation context.

OBJECTIVES

This study assessed the strategies adopted for the implementation of AMS interventions in LTCFs, whether they considered organizational characteristics, and their effectiveness.

DATA SOURCES

Electronic databases until April 2022.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Articles covering implementation of AMS interventions in LTCFs.

ASSESSMENT OF RISK OF BIAS

Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool for empirical studies.

METHODS OF DATA SYNTHESIS

Data were collected on AMS interventions and context characteristics (e.g. type of facility, staffing, and residents). Implementation strategies and outcomes were mapped according to the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) framework and validated taxonomy for implementation outcomes. Implementation and clinical effectiveness were assessed according to the primary and secondary outcomes results provided in each study.

RESULTS

Among 48 studies included in the analysis, 19 (40%) used implementation strategies corresponding to one to three ERIC domains, including education and training (n = 36/48, 75%), evaluative and iterative strategies (n = 24/48, 50%), and support clinicians (n = 23/48, 48%). Only 8/48 (17%) studies made use of implementation theories, frameworks, or models. Fidelity and sustainability were reported respectively in 21 (70%) and 3 (10%) of 27 studies providing implementation outcomes. Implementation strategy was considered effective in 11/27 (41%) studies, mainly including actions to improve use (n = 6/11, 54%) and education (n = 4/11, 36%). Of the 42 interventions, 18/42 (43%) were deemed clinically effective. Among 21 clinically effective studies, implementation was deemed effective in four and partially effective in five. Two studies were clinically effective despite having non-effective implementation.

CONCLUSIONS

The effectiveness of AMS interventions in LTCFs largely differed according to the interventions' content and implementation strategies adopted. Implementation frameworks should be considered to adapt and tailor interventions and strategies to the local context.

The role of infectious disease consultations in the management of patients with fever in a long-term care facility

BACKGROUND

Infectious disease (ID) clinicians can provide essential services for febrile patients in tertiary hospitals. The aim of this study was to evaluate the role of ID consultations (IDC) in managing hospitalized patients with infections in an oriental medical hospital (OMH), which serves as a long-term care facility. To our knowledge, this is the first study on the role of IDCs in managing patients in an OMH.

METHODS

This retrospective study was conducted in an OMH in Seoul, Korea, from June 2006 to June 2013.

RESULTS

Among the 465 cases of hospital-acquired fever, 141 (30.3%) were referred for ID. The most common cause of fever was infection in both groups. The peak body temperature of the patient was higher in IDC group (38.8±0.6°C vs. 38.6±0.5°C, p<0.001). Crude mortality at 30 days (14.6% vs. 7.8%, p = 0.043) and infection-attributable mortality (15.3% vs. 6.7%, p = 0.039) were higher in the No-IDC group. Multivariable analysis showed that infection as the focus of fever (adjusted Odd ratio [aOR] 3.49, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.64-7.44), underlying cancer (aOR 10.32, 95% CI 4.34-24.51,), and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome (aOR 15.68, 95% CI 2.06-119.08) were associated with increased 30-day mortality. Multivariate analysis showed that in patients with infectious fever, appropriate antibiotic therapy (aOR 0.19, 95% CI 0.05-0.76) was the only factor associated with decreased infection-attributable mortality while underlying cancer (aOR 7.80, 95% CI 2.555-23.807) and severe sepsis or septic shock at the onset of fever (aOR 10.15, 95% CI 1.00-102.85) were associated with increased infection-attributable mortality.

CONCLUSION

Infection was the most common cause of fever in patients hospitalized for OMH. Infection as the focus of fever, underlying cancer, and MODS was associated with increased 30-day mortality in patients with nosocomial fever. Appropriate antibiotic therapy was associated with decreased infection-attributable mortality in patients with infectious fever.

Interventions to improve appropriate antibiotic prescribing in long-term care facilities: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Overuse of antibiotics has contributed to antimicrobial resistance; a growing public health threat. In long-term care facilities, levels of inappropriate prescribing are as high as 75%. Numerous interventions targeting long-term care facilities' antimicrobial stewardship have been reported with varying, and largely unexplained, effects. Therefore, this review aimed to apply behavioural science frameworks to specify the component behaviour change techniques of stewardship interventions in long-term care facilities and identify those components associated with improved outcomes.

METHOD

A systematic review (CRD42018103803) was conducted through electronic database searches. Two behavioural science frameworks, the Behaviour Change Wheel and Behaviour Change Technique Taxonomy were used to classify intervention descriptions into intervention types and component behaviour change techniques used. Study design and outcome heterogeneity prevented meta-analysis and meta-regression. Interventions were categorised as 'very promising' (all outcomes statistically significant), 'quite promising' (some outcomes statistically significant), or 'not promising' (no outcomes statistically significant). 'Promise ratios' (PR) were calculated for identified intervention types and behaviour change techniques by dividing the number of (very or quite) promising interventions featuring the intervention type or behaviour change technique by the number of interventions featuring the intervention type or behaviour change technique that were not promising. Promising intervention types and behaviour change techniques were defined as those with a PR ≥ 2.

RESULTS

Twenty studies (of19 interventions) were included. Seven interventions (37%) were 'very promising', eight 'quite promising' (42%) and four 'not promising' (21%). Most promising intervention types were 'persuasion' (n = 12; promise ratio (PR) = 5.0), 'enablement' (n = 16; PR = 4.33) and 'education' (n = 19; PR = 3.75). Most promising behaviour change techniques were 'feedback on behaviour' (n = 9; PR = 8.0) and 'restructuring the social environment' (e.g. staff role changes; n = 8; PR = 7.0).

CONCLUSION

Systematic identification of the active ingredients of antimicrobial stewardship in long-term care facilities was facilitated through the application of behavioural science frameworks. Incorporating environmental restructuring and performance feedback may be promising intervention strategies for antimicrobial stewardship interventions within long-term care facilities.

High 30-day readmission rates associated with Clostridiumdifficile infection

BACKGROUND

Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) is a leading cause of community-onset and healthcare-associated infection, with high recurrence rates, and associated high morbidity and mortality. We report national rates, leading causes, and predictors of hospital readmission for CDI.

METHODS

Retrospective study of data from the 2013 Nationwide Readmissions Database of patients with a primary diagnosis of CDI and re-hospitalization within 30-days. A multivariate regression model was used to identify predictors of readmission.

RESULTS

Of 38,409 patients admitted with a primary diagnosis of CDI, 21% were readmitted within 30-days, and 27% of those patients were readmitted with a primary diagnosis of CDI. Infections accounted for 47% of all readmissions. Female sex, anemia/coagulation defects, renal failure/electrolyte abnormalities and discharge to home (versus facility) were 12%, 13%, 15%, 36%, respectively, more likely to be readmitted with CDI.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that 1-in-5 patients hospitalized with CDI were readmitted to the hospital within 30-days. Infection comprised nearly half of these readmissions, with CDI being the most common etiology. Predictors of readmission with CDI include female sex, history of renal failure/electrolyte imbalances, anemia/coagulation defects, and being discharged home. CDI is associated with a high readmission risk, with evidence of several predictive risks for readmission.

Influence of Aging and Environment on Presentation of Infection in Older Adults

In older adults, pathophysiologic, clinical, and environmental factors all affect the presentation of infections. We explore how age-related changes influence the manifestation and evaluation of infections in this population. Specific topics include immunosenescence, age-related organ-specific physiologic changes, and frailty. We also describe clinical factors influencing infection risk and presentation in older adults, including temperature regulation, cognitive decline, and malnutrition. Finally, we discuss the influence of the setting in which older adults reside on the clinical evaluation of infection. Understanding the influence of all these changes may facilitate the prevention, early recognition, and treatment of infections in older adults.

Interventions to improve antibiotic prescribing practices for hospital inpatients

BACKGROUND

Antibiotic resistance is a major public health problem. Infections caused by multidrug-resistant bacteria are associated with prolonged hospital stay and death compared with infections caused by susceptible bacteria. Appropriate antibiotic use in hospitals should ensure effective treatment of patients with infection and reduce unnecessary prescriptions. We updated this systematic review to evaluate the impact of interventions to improve antibiotic prescribing to hospital inpatients.

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the effectiveness and safety of interventions to improve antibiotic prescribing to hospital inpatients and to investigate the effect of two intervention functions: restriction and enablement.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, and Embase. We searched for additional studies using the bibliographies of included articles and personal files. The last search from which records were evaluated and any studies identified incorporated into the review was January 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised studies (NRS). We included three non-randomised study designs to measure behavioural and clinical outcomes and analyse variation in the effects: non- randomised trials (NRT), controlled before-after (CBA) studies and interrupted time series (ITS) studies. For this update we also included three additional NRS designs (case control, cohort, and qualitative studies) to identify unintended consequences. Interventions included any professional or structural interventions as defined by the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group. We defined restriction as 'using rules to reduce the opportunity to engage in the target behaviour (or increase the target behaviour by reducing the opportunity to engage in competing behaviours)'. We defined enablement as 'increasing means/reducing barriers to increase capability or opportunity'. The main comparison was between intervention and no intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors extracted data and assessed study risk of bias. We performed meta-analysis and meta-regression of RCTs and meta-regression of ITS studies. We classified behaviour change functions for all interventions in the review, including those studies in the previously published versions. We analysed dichotomous data with a risk difference (RD). We assessed certainty of evidence with GRADE criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

This review includes 221 studies (58 RCTs, and 163 NRS). Most studies were from North America (96) or Europe (87). The remaining studies were from Asia (19), South America (8), Australia (8), and the East Asia (3). Although 62% of RCTs were at a high risk of bias, the results for the main review outcomes were similar when we restricted the analysis to studies at low risk of bias.More hospital inpatients were treated according to antibiotic prescribing policy with the intervention compared with no intervention based on 29 RCTs of predominantly enablement interventions (RD 15%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 14% to 16%; 23,394 participants; high-certainty evidence). This represents an increase from 43% to 58% .There were high levels of heterogeneity of effect size but the direction consistently favoured intervention.The duration of antibiotic treatment decreased by 1.95 days (95% CI 2.22 to 1.67; 14 RCTs; 3318 participants; high-certainty evidence) from 11.0 days. Information from non-randomised studies showed interventions to be associated with improvement in prescribing according to antibiotic policy in routine clinical practice, with 70% of interventions being hospital-wide compared with 31% for RCTs. The risk of death was similar between intervention and control groups (11% in both arms), indicating that antibiotic use can likely be reduced without adversely affecting mortality (RD 0%, 95% CI -1% to 0%; 28 RCTs; 15,827 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Antibiotic stewardship interventions probably reduce length of stay by 1.12 days (95% CI 0.7 to 1.54 days; 15 RCTs; 3834 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). One RCT and six NRS raised concerns that restrictive interventions may lead to delay in treatment and negative professional culture because of breakdown in communication and trust between infection specialists and clinical teams (low-certainty evidence).Both enablement and restriction were independently associated with increased compliance with antibiotic policies, and enablement enhanced the effect of restrictive interventions (high-certainty evidence). Enabling interventions that included feedback were probably more effective than those that did not (moderate-certainty evidence).There was very low-certainty evidence about the effect of the interventions on reducing Clostridium difficile infections (median -48.6%, interquartile range -80.7% to -19.2%; 7 studies). This was also the case for resistant gram-negative bacteria (median -12.9%, interquartile range -35.3% to 25.2%; 11 studies) and resistant gram-positive bacteria (median -19.3%, interquartile range -50.1% to +23.1%; 9 studies). There was too much variance in microbial outcomes to reliably assess the effect of change in antibiotic use. Heterogeneity of intervention effect on prescribing outcomesWe analysed effect modifiers in 29 RCTs and 91 ITS studies. Enablement and restriction were independently associated with a larger effect size (high-certainty evidence). Feedback was included in 4 (17%) of 23 RCTs and 20 (47%) of 43 ITS studies of enabling interventions and was associated with greater intervention effect. Enablement was included in 13 (45%) of 29 ITS studies with restrictive interventions and enhanced intervention effect.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found high-certainty evidence that interventions are effective in increasing compliance with antibiotic policy and reducing duration of antibiotic treatment. Lower use of antibiotics probably does not increase mortality and likely reduces length of stay. Additional trials comparing antibiotic stewardship with no intervention are unlikely to change our conclusions. Enablement consistently increased the effect of interventions, including those with a restrictive component. Although feedback further increased intervention effect, it was used in only a minority of enabling interventions. Interventions were successful in safely reducing unnecessary antibiotic use in hospitals, despite the fact that the majority did not use the most effective behaviour change techniques. Consequently, effective dissemination of our findings could have considerable health service and policy impact. Future research should instead focus on targeting treatment and assessing other measures of patient safety, assess different stewardship interventions, and explore the barriers and facilitators to implementation. More research is required on unintended consequences of restrictive interventions.

Infection Prevention and Antimicrobial Stewardship Knowledge for Selected Infections Among Nursing Home Personnel

OBJECTIVE To assess knowledge about infection prevention among nursing home personnel and identify gaps potentially addressable through a quality improvement collaborative. DESIGN Baseline knowledge assessment of catheter-associated urinary tract infection, asymptomatic bacteriuria, antimicrobial stewardship, and general infection prevention practices for healthcare-associated infections. SETTING Nursing homes across 14 states participating in the national "Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Safety Program for Long-Term Care: Healthcare-Associated Infections/Catheter-Associated Urinary Tract Infection." PARTICIPANTS Licensed (RNs, LPNs, APRNs, MDs) and unlicensed (clinical nursing assistants) healthcare personnel. METHODS Each facility aimed to obtain responses from at least 10 employees (5 licensed and 5 unlicensed). We assessed the percentage of correct responses. RESULTS A total of 184 (78%) of 236 participating facilities provided 1 response or more. Of the 1,626 respondents, 822 (50.6%) were licensed; 117 facilities (63.6%) were for-profit. While 99.1% of licensed personnel recognized the definition of asymptomatic bacteriuria, only 36.1% knew that pyuria could not distinguish a urinary tract infection from asymptomatic bacteriuria. Among unlicensed personnel, 99.6% knew to notify a nurse if a resident developed fever or confusion, but only 27.7% knew that cloudy, smelly urine should not routinely be cultured. Although 100% of respondents reported receiving training in hand hygiene, less than 30% knew how long to rub hands (28.5% licensed, 25.2% unlicensed) or the most effective agent to use (11.7% licensed, 10.6% unlicensed). CONCLUSIONS This national assessment demonstrates an important need to enhance infection prevention knowledge among healthcare personnel working in nursing homes to improve resident safety and quality of care. Infect. Control Hosp. Epidemiol. 2016;1-6.

Clostridium difficile Infection Among Veterans Health Administration Patients

OBJECTIVE

To report on the prevalence and incidence of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) from 2009 to 2013 among Veterans Healthcare Administration patients

DESIGN

A retrospective descriptive analysis of data extracted from a large electronic medical record (EMR) database

SETTING

Data were acquired from VHA healthcare records from 2009 to 2013 that included outpatient clinical visits, long-term care, and hospitalized care as well as pharmacy and laboratory information.

RESULTS

In 2009, there were 10,207 CDI episodes, and in 2013, there were 12,143 CDI episodes, an increase of 19.0%. The overall CDI rate increased by 8.4% from 193 episodes per 100,000 patient years in 2009 to 209 episodes per 100,000 patient years in 2013. Of the CDI episodes identified in 2009, 58% were identified during a hospitalization, and 42% were identified in an outpatient setting. In 2013, 44% of the CDI episodes were identified in an outpatient setting.

CONCLUSION

This is one of the largest studies that has utilized timely EMR data to describe the current CDI epidemiology at the VHA. Despite an aging population with greater burden of comorbidity than the general US population, our data show that VHA CDI rates stabilized between 2011 and 2013 following increases likely attributable to the introduction of the more sensitive nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs). The findings in this report will help establish an accurate benchmark against which both current and future VA CDI prevention initiatives can be measured.

Infect. Control Hosp. Epidemiol. 2015;36(9):1038–1045

Clostridium difficile in the Long-Term Care Facility: Prevention and Management

Residents of long-term care facilities are at high risk for Clostridium difficile infection due to frequent antibiotic exposure in a population already rendered vulnerable to infection due to advanced age, multiple comorbid conditions and communal living conditions. Moreover, asymptomatic carriage of toxigenic C. difficile and recurrent infections are prevalent in this population. Here, we discuss epidemiology and management of C. difficile infection among residents of long-term care facilities. Also, recognizing that both the population and culture differs significantly from that of hospitals, we also address prevention strategies specific to LTCFs.

Biofilm-based infections in long-term care facilities

The recent trend in the early admittance to long-term care facilities (LTCFs) of severely injured patients transferred from general hospitals has given a new dynamic to the incidence of healthcare-associated infections, including biofilm-based infections related to the implant of urinary and intravascular catheters, and the onset of pressure ulcers. Catheter-associated urinary tract infections lead in most of the surveys on LTCFs, approximately 80% of urinary tract infections in these settings being due to the short- or long-term insertion of a urinary catheter. Furthermore, the implantation of intravascular catheters is often responsible for catheter-related bloodstream infections caused by the development of an intraluminal biofilm. Pressure ulcers, frequently occurring in bedridden patients admitted to LTCFs, are also susceptible to infection by biofilm-growing aerobic and anaerobic bacteria, the biofilm formation on the wound being the main reason for its delayed healing.

Strategies and challenges of antimicrobial stewardship in long-term care facilities

As people are living longer the demand for long-term care facilities (LTCFs) continues to rise. For many reasons, antimicrobials are used intensively in LTCFs, with up to a half of this use considered inappropriate or unnecessary. Over-use of antimicrobials can have direct adverse consequences for LTCF residents and promotes the development and spread of resistant bacteria. It is therefore critical that LTCFs are able to engage in antimicrobial stewardship programmes, which have the potential to minimize the antibiotic selective pressure, while improving the quality of care received by LTCF residents. To date, no antimicrobial stewardship guidelines specific to LTCF settings have been published. Here we outline the scale of antimicrobial use in LTCFs and the underlying drivers for antibiotic over-use. We further describe the particular challenges of antimicrobial stewardship in LTCFs, and review the interventional studies that have aimed to improve antibiotic use in these settings. Practical recommendations are then drawn from this research to help guide the development and implementation of antimicrobial stewardship programmes.

Antimicrobial stewardship in residential aged care facilities: need and readiness assessment

Background

Information about the feasibility, barriers and facilitators of antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) in residential aged care facilities (RACFs) has been scant. Exploring the prevailing perceptions and attitudes of key healthcare providers towards antibiotic prescribing behaviour, antibiotic resistance and AMS in the RACF setting is imperative to guide AMS interventions.

Methods

Semi-structured interviews and focus groups were conducted with key RACF healthcare providers until saturation of themes occurred. Participants were recruited using purposive and snowball sampling. The framework approach was applied for data analysis.

Results

A total of 40 nurses, 15 general practitioners (GPs) and 6 pharmacists from 12 RACFs were recruited. Five major themes emerged; perceptions of current antibiotic prescribing behaviour, perceptions of antibiotic resistance, attitude towards and understanding of AMS, perceived barriers to and facilitators of AMS implementation, and feasible AMS interventions. A higher proportion of GPs and pharmacists compared with nurses felt there was over-prescribing of antibiotics in the RACF setting. Antibiotic resistance was generally perceived as an issue for infection control rather than impacting clinical decisions. All key stakeholders were supportive of AMS implementation in RACFs; however, they recognized barriers related to workload and logistical issues. A range of practical AMS interventions were identified, with nursing-based education, aged-care specific antibiotic guidelines and regular antibiotic surveillance deemed most useful and feasible.

Conclusions

Areas of antibiotic over-prescribing have been identified from different healthcare providers’ perspectives. However, concern about the clinical impact of antibiotic resistance was generally lacking. Importantly, information gathered about feasibility, barriers and facilitators of various AMS interventions will provide important insights to guide development of AMS programs in the RACF setting.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1471-2334-14-410) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Interventions to improve antibiotic prescribing practices for hospital inpatients

BACKGROUND

The first publication of this review in Issue 3, 2005 included studies up to November 2003. This update adds studies to December 2006 and focuses on application of a new method for meta-analysis of interrupted time series studies and application of new Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) Risk of Bias criteria to all studies in the review, including those studies in the previously published version. The aim of the review is to evaluate the impact of interventions from the perspective of antibiotic stewardship. The two objectives of antibiotic stewardship are first to ensure effective treatment for patients with bacterial infection and second support professionals and patients to reduce unnecessary use and minimize collateral damage.

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the effectiveness of professional interventions that, alone or in combination, are effective in antibiotic stewardship for hospital inpatients, to evaluate the impact of these interventions on reducing the incidence of antimicrobial-resistant pathogens or Clostridium difficile infection and their impact on clinical outcome.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE from 1980 to December 2006 and the EPOC specialized register in July 2007 and February 2009 and bibliographies of retrieved articles. The main comparison is between interventions that had a restrictive element and those that were purely persuasive. Restrictive interventions were implemented through restriction of the freedom of prescribers to select some antibiotics. Persuasive interventions used one or more of the following methods for changing professional behaviour: dissemination of educational resources, reminders, audit and feedback, or educational outreach. Restrictive interventions could contain persuasive elements.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized clinical trials (RCTs), controlled clinical trials (CCT), controlled before-after (CBA) and interrupted time series studies (ITS). Interventions included any professional or structural interventions as defined by EPOC. The intervention had to include a component that aimed to improve antibiotic prescribing to hospital inpatients, either by increasing effective treatment or by reducing unnecessary treatment. The results had to include interpretable data about the effect of the intervention on antibiotic prescribing or microbial outcomes or relevant clinical outcomes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors extracted data and assessed quality. We performed meta-regression of ITS studies to compare the results of persuasive and restrictive interventions. Persuasive interventions advised physicians about how to prescribe or gave them feedback about how they prescribed. Restrictive interventions put a limit on how they prescribed; for example, physicians had to have approval from an infection specialist in order to prescribe an antibiotic. We standardized the results of some ITS studies so that they are on the same scale (percent change in outcome), thereby facilitating comparisons of different interventions. To do this, we used the change in level and change in slope to estimate the effect size with increasing time after the intervention (one month, six months, one year, etc) as the percent change in level at each time point. We did not extrapolate beyond the end of data collection after the intervention. The meta-regression was performed using standard weighted linear regression with the standard errors of the coefficients adjusted where necessary.

MAIN RESULTS

For this update we included 89 studies that reported 95 interventions. Of the 89 studies, 56 were ITSs (of which 4 were controlled ITSs), 25 were RCT (of which 5 were cluster-RCTs), 5 were CBAs and 3 were CCTs (of which 1 was a cluster-CCT).Most (80/95, 84%) of the interventions targeted the antibiotic prescribed (choice of antibiotic, timing of first dose and route of administration). The remaining 15 interventions aimed to change exposure of patients to antibiotics by targeting the decision to treat or the duration of treatment. Reliable data about impact on antibiotic prescribing data were available for 76 interventions (44 persuasive, 24 restrictive and 8 structural). For the persuasive interventions, the median change in antibiotic prescribing was 42.3% for the ITSs, 31.6% for the controlled ITSs, 17.7% for the CBAs, 3.5% for the cluster-RCTs and 24.7% for the RCTs. The restrictive interventions had a median effect size of 34.7% for the ITSs, 17.1% for the CBAs and 40.5% for the RCTs. The structural interventions had a median effect of 13.3% for the RCTs and 23.6% for the cluster-RCTs. Data about impact on microbial outcomes were available for 21 interventions but only 6 of these also had reliable data about impact on antibiotic prescribing.Meta-analysis of 52 ITS studies was used to compare restrictive versus purely persuasive interventions. Restrictive interventions had significantly greater impact on prescribing outcomes at one month (32%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2% to 61%, P = 0.03) and on microbial outcomes at 6 months (53%, 95% CI 31% to 75%, P = 0.001) but there were no significant differences at 12 or 24 months. Interventions intended to decrease excessive prescribing were associated with reduction in Clostridium difficile infections and colonization or infection with aminoglycoside- or cephalosporin-resistant gram-negative bacteria, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecalis. Meta-analysis of clinical outcomes showed that four interventions intended to increase effective prescribing for pneumonia were associated with significant reduction in mortality (risk ratio 0.89, 95% CI 0.82 to 0.97), whereas nine interventions intended to decrease excessive prescribing were not associated with significant increase in mortality (risk ratio 0.92, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.06).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The results show that interventions to reduce excessive antibiotic prescribing to hospital inpatients can reduce antimicrobial resistance or hospital-acquired infections, and interventions to increase effective prescribing can improve clinical outcome. This update provides more evidence about unintended clinical consequences of interventions and about the effect of interventions to reduce exposure of patients to antibiotics. The meta-analysis supports the use of restrictive interventions when the need is urgent, but suggests that persuasive and restrictive interventions are equally effective after six months.