Development of quality indicators to evaluate antibiotic treatment of patients with community-acquired pneumonia in Indonesia

Generation of Indicators to Assess Quality of Health Care in Hospital at Home Through e-Delphi

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The quality of health care in hospital at home (HaH) has been measured in different countries using simple indicators and clinical results that only contribute to some dimensions of the quality of health care. We sought to generate indicators to comprehensively evaluate the quality of health care provided to HaH users through the e-Delphi technique.

METHODS

The e-Delphi technique was performed with the participation of 17 HaH experts. The methodological strategy applied in this study was divided into the following 3 phases: a preparatory phase; consultation phase; and consensus phase. Three rounds of consultations were conducted with experts. In round 1, they were asked to identify which aspects of HaH they believed should be evaluated using an indicator for each of the following 6 dimensions of health care quality: effectiveness; efficiency; timeliness; patient-centered care; equity; and safety. In round 2, they were asked to rate each indicator using a 5-point Likert-type scale with the following values: (1) Totally disagree; (2) Disagree; (3) Moderately agree; (4) Agree; and (5) Totally agree. The criteria for evaluating each indicator were as follows: (1) The indicator is a useful measure for assessing the quality of health care provided to HaH users. (2) The indicator is clearly and specifically written and does not require modification. (3) The indicator is essential and incorporates information that can be extracted from HaH program records. An indicator was considered approved if it received at least 65% approval from the expert panel for each evaluation criterion. In round 3, experts were asked to reassess their ratings, taking into account the opinions of the other experts. The reliability of this technique was ensured through credibility, reliability, and confirmability. We obtained ethical approval of the corresponding institutions and informed consent from the participating experts.

RESULTS

Nine unpublished and reliable indicators were generated. In addition, 13 indicators were incorporated that evaluate aspects previously analyzed by other authors and/or national and international institutions, which were adapted to be used in HaH. The total indicators generated (n = 22) represented all dimensions of the quality of health care: safety; opportunity; effectiveness; efficiency; equity; and patient-centered care.

CONCLUSIONS

The 22 indicators generated through the e-Delphi technique permit a comprehensive evaluation of the quality of health care provided to HaH users.

Identifying AWaRe indicators for appropriate antibiotic use: a narrative review

INTRODUCTION

Quality indicators (QIs) are widely used tools for antibiotic stewardship programmes. The Access, Watch, Reserve (AWaRe) system has been developed by the WHO to classify antibiotics based on their spectrum of activity and potential selection of antibiotic resistance. This review aimed to identify existing indicators for optimal antibiotic use to inform the development of future AWaRe QIs.

METHODS

A literature search was performed in PubMed. We included articles describing QIs for hospital and primary healthcare antibiotic use. We extracted information about (i) the type of infection; (ii) setting; (iii) target for quality assessment; and (iv) methodology used for the development. We then identified the indicators that reflected the guidance provided in the AWaRe system.

RESULTS

A total of 773 indicators for antibiotic use were identified. The management of health services and/or workers, the consumption of antibiotics, and antibiotic prescribing/dispensing were the principal targets for quality assessment. There was a similar distribution of indicators across primary and secondary care. For infection-specific indicators, about 50% focused on respiratory tract infections. Only a few QIs included information on review treatment or microbiological investigations. Although only 8 (1%) indicators directly cited the AWaRe system in the wording of the indicators, 445 (57.6%) indicators reflected the guidance provided in the AWaRe book.

CONCLUSIONS

A high number of indicators for appropriate antibiotic use have been developed. However, few are currently based directly on the WHO AWaRe system. There is a clear need to develop globally applicable AWaRe based indicators that can be integrated into antibiotic stewardship programmes.

An in-depth analysis of antimicrobial prescription quality in 10 non-university hospitals, in southwest Germany, 2021

BackgroundNon-university hospitals are the major provider of inpatient care in Germany, serving 89% of acute care hospital beds. Although surveillance data on antimicrobial use in hospitals are widely available, data on prescription quality are rare.AimWe aimed to provide an in-depth analysis of antimicrobial prescribing patterns and quality in southwest German non-university hospitals.MethodsDuring 2021, we performed three point prevalence surveys (PPS) in 10 non-university hospitals, representing ca 10% of hospital beds in the federal state of Baden-Württemberg (11 million inhabitants). Demographic and clinical information were collected. We assessed the overall performance of 14 validated process quality indicators (QI) covering infection diagnostics, antimicrobial therapy and documentation.ResultsOf 8,560 patients analysed, 2,861 (33%) received at least one antimicrobial. Most (2,789, 80%) antimicrobial prescriptions were for therapeutic indications. Most frequently prescribed agents were beta-lactam/beta-lactamase inhibitors (1,120, 40%) in therapeutic and cefuroxime (269, 37%) in prophylactic indications. According to the World Health Organization's Access, Watch, Reserve classification, the Access-to-Watch ratio was 0.73. Overall adherence to QIs was low and varied substantially (27-93%), with documentation, possible streamlining and switching to oral therapy exhibiting the lowest fulfilment rates (< 50%).ConclusionThe results indicate a need to improve antimicrobial prescribing quality in non-university hospitals. The high prevalence of antimicrobial use in our setting underlines the demand for sustainable antimicrobial stewardship programmes in this sector. Our QI-based PPS approach can be used to identify key targets for future antimicrobial stewardship interventions. The results indicate a need for further legislation on antimicrobial stewardship.

Quality indicators for hospital antimicrobial stewardship programmes: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Measuring the quality and effectiveness of antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) programmes with quality indicators (QIs) is an area of increasing interest. We conducted a systematic review to identify QIs of AMS programmes in the hospital setting and critically appraise their methodological quality.

METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Scopus/web of science databases and the grey literature for studies that defined and/or described the development process and characteristics of the QIs developed. The Appraisal of Indicators through Research and Evaluation (AIRE) instrument was used to critically appraise the methodological quality of the QI sets.

RESULTS

We identified 16 studies of QI sets consisting of 229 QIs. The QI sets addressed a broad range of areas of AMS in the hospital setting and consisted of 75% process indicators, 24% structural indicators and 1% outcome indicators. There was a wide variation in the information and level of detail presented describing the methodological characteristics of the QI sets identified.

CONCLUSIONS

The QIs identified in this study focused on process and structural indicators with few outcome indicators developed-a major deficiency in this area. Future research should focus on the development of outcome indicators or the use of process or structural indicators linked to outcomes to assess AMS. Testing of the QIs in practice is an essential methodological element of the QI development process and should be included in the QI development study or as planned validation work.

Clinimetric properties and suitability of selected quality indicators for assessing antibiotic use in hospitalized adults: a multicentre point prevalence study in 24 hospitals in Germany

OBJECTIVES

The capability to measure and monitor the quality of antibiotic prescribing is an important component of antibiotic stewardship (ABS) programmes. Several catalogues of consensus-based structure and process-of-care quality indicators (QIs) have been proposed, but only a few studies have tested and validated ABS QIs in practice tests. This multicentre study determined the clinimetric properties and suitability of a set of 33 process QIs for ABS that had earlier been developed and in part recommended in a German-Austrian hospital ABS practice guideline.

METHODS

Two point prevalence surveys were conducted in a convenience sample of 24 acute care hospitals throughout Germany, and data of all screened adult inpatients with prescription of a systemic antibiotic at a given day (n=4310) were included in the study. For each QI, the following clinimetric properties were assessed: applicability, feasibility, performance, case mix stability and interobserver reliability.

RESULTS

Eighteen QIs were considered sufficiently feasible, applicable and reliable, and had adequate room for improvement. The finally selected QIs primarily cover antibiotic therapy of common infections (bloodstream infection, pneumonia and urinary tract infection), while two of the QIs each address surgical prophylaxis and general aspects of antibiotic administration.

CONCLUSIONS

Practice tests may be important to test the suitability of consensus process-of-care QIs in the field of hospital ABS. The 18 selected QIs considered suitable enough for hospital ABS in this study should be regarded as priority QIs useful for internal quality control and assurance. More research and additional practice tests may be needed to confirm their suitability for external quality assessment schemes.

Assessment of Quality Indicators for Appropriate Antibiotic Use

One of the critical elements of antimicrobial stewardship programs is the ability to measure the quality of antibiotic prescriptions. The aims of the present study were to evaluate the performance properties of a set of previously developed quality indicators (QIs) and to identify the potential room for improvement in antibiotic use in our setting. A monthly cross-sectional point prevalence survey was conducted in a 400-bed acute care teaching hospital, from June to November 2015. All adult patients treated for ≥24 hours with antibiotic therapy for a suspected hospital- or community-acquired bacterial infection were included. Performance scores (adherence, room for improvement, interobserver reliability, and applicability) were calculated for 8 QIs. A total of 362 patients were evaluated. Adherence to the whole set of QIs was accomplished for 14.1% of evaluable patients. The QIs with greater room for improvement were adequate request for blood cultures (60.6%), therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) (59.1%), sequential antibiotic therapy within 72 hours (48.2%), and empirical antibiotic therapy according to local guidelines (30.4%). The percentage of patients receiving unnecessary antibiotic treatment in the absence of clinical or microbiological evidence of infection after 5 days was 12.2%. All indicators scored kappa values of ≥0.6, suggesting good interobserver reliability. Low applicability (6.1% of reviewed patients) was found only for the TDM QI. The QIs analyzed were found to be applicable, showed good interobserver reliability, and were useful tools to identify areas with potential room for improvement in antibiotic use.

A Systematic Review of Quality Indicators for Appropriate Antibiotic Use in Hospitalized Adult Patients

Many quality indicators for appropriate antibiotic use have been developed. We aimed to make a systematic inventory, including the development methodology and validation procedures, of currently available quality indicators (QIs) for appropriate antibiotic use in hospitalized adult patients. We performed a literature search in the Pubmed interface. From the included articles we abstracted i) the indicators developed ii) the type of infection the QIs applied to iii) study design used for the development of the QIs iv) relation of the QIs to outcome measures v) whether the QIs were validated and vi) the characteristics of the validation cohort. Fourteen studies were included, in which 200 QIs were developed. The most frequently mentioned indicators concerned empirical antibiotic therapy according to the guideline (71% of studies), followed by switch from IV to oral therapy (64% of studies), followed by drawing at least two sets of blood cultures and change to pathogen-directed therapy based on culture results (57% of studies). Most QIs were specifically developed for lower respiratory tract infection, urinary tract infection or sepsis. A RAND-modified Delphi procedure was used in the majority of studies (57%). Six studies took outcome measures into consideration during the procedure. Five out of fourteen studies (36%) tested the clinimetric properties of the QIs and 65% of the tested QIs were considered valid. Many studies report the development of quality indicators for appropriate antibiotic use in hospitalized adult patients. However, only a small number of studies validated the developed QIs. Future validation of QIs is needed if we want to implement them in daily practice.