Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27025520›Full record

ReviewAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland)2016

A Review of Quality Measures for Assessing the Impact of Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs in Hospitals.

Mary Richard Akpan, Raheelah Ahmad, Nada Atef Shebl, Diane Ashiru-Oredope

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

28 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. The intricacies ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2025
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Establishing obstetrics-specific metrics and interventions for antimicrobial stewardship.Journal of the Association of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Disease Canada = Journal officiel de l'Association pour la microbiologie medicale et l'infectiologie Canada · 2023
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Antimicrobial stewardship in hospitals in Latin America and the Caribbean: a scoping review.Revista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health · 2020
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Mary Richard AkpanDepartment of Pharmacy, Pharmacology and Postgraduate Medicine, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, AL10 9AB, UK. m.akpan@herts.ac.uk.
Raheelah AhmadNIHR Health Protection Research Unit in Healthcare Associated Infection and Antimicrobial Resistance at Imperial College London, Hammersmith Campus, Du Cane Road, London, W12 0NN, UK. raheelah.ahmad00@imperial.ac.uk.
Nada Atef SheblDepartment of Pharmacy, Pharmacology and Postgraduate Medicine, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, AL10 9AB, UK. n.a.shebl@herts.ac.uk.
Diane Ashiru-OredopeAntimicrobial Resistance Program, Public Health England, London, NW9 5EQ, UK. diane.ashiru-oredope@phe.gov.uk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The growing problem of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) has led to calls for antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASP) to control antibiotic use in healthcare settings. Key strategies include prospective audit with feedback and intervention, and formulary restriction and preauthorization. Education, guidelines, clinical pathways, de-escalation, and intravenous to oral conversion are also part of some programs. Impact and quality of ASP can be assessed using process or outcome measures. Outcome measures are categorized as microbiological, patient or financial outcomes. The objective of this review was to provide an overview of quality measures for assessing ASP and the reported impact of ASP in peer-reviewed studies, focusing particularly on patient outcomes. A literature search of papers published in English between 1990 and June 2015 was conducted in five databases using a combination of search terms. Primary studies of any design were included. A total of 63 studies were included in this review. Four studies defined quality metrics for evaluating ASP. Twenty-one studies assessed the impact of ASP on antimicrobial utilization and cost, 25 studies evaluated impact on resistance patterns and/or rate of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI). Thirteen studies assessed impact on patient outcomes including mortality, length of stay (LOS) and readmission rates. Six of these 13 studies reported non-significant difference in mortality between pre- and post-ASP intervention, and five reported reductions in mortality rate. On LOS, six studies reported shorter LOS post intervention; a significant reduction was reported in one of these studies. Of note, this latter study reported significantly (p < 0.001) higher unplanned readmissions related to infections post-ASP. Patient outcomes need to be a key component of ASP evaluation. The choice of metrics is influenced by data and resource availability. Controlling for confounders must be considered in the design of evaluation studies to adequately capture the impact of ASP and it is important for unintended consequences to be considered. This review provides a starting point toward compiling standard outcome metrics for assessing ASP.

Indexed as

antimicrobial resistanceantimicrobial stewardshipinfectious diseasesoutcomepatientquality indicators

Identifiers

PMID27025520
PMCPMC4810407

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.