ArticleJAC-antimicrobial resistance2021
Nationwide audit and feedback on implementation of antibiotic stewardship programmes in Norwegian hospitals.
Article in JAC-antimicrobial resistance, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bridging the Gap Between Strategy and Implementation in Antimicrobial Stewardship: Insights from the ARCO Step II Interregional Delphi Consensus in Northeastern Italy.Microorganisms · 2026Article
- Geographic signatures in the oral resistome: a comparative metagenomic analysis of healthy individuals from Thailand and Norway.Journal of oral microbiology · 2025Article
- The Impact of National Activities on Antibiotic Consumption in Hospitals and Different Departments over a 14-Year Period.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Article
- Overuse of Antibiotics: Who is to Blame? A Qualitative Study.International journal of preventive medicine · 2023Article
- Multidisciplinary neurosurgical rounds incorporating antimicrobial stewardship. Are they of benefit?Brain & spine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundImplementation of antibiotic stewardship programmes (ASPs) in hospitals is challenging and there is a knowledge gap on how to pursue this process efficiently.
objectivesTo evaluate whether audit and feedback (A&F) is a feasible and useful methodology to assess and support the implementation of ASPs in hospitals.
methodsA multidisciplinary team performed document reviews and on-site interviews with professionals involved in the implementation of ASPs. Oral feedback on preliminary findings and areas of improvement were provided on-site, followed by feedback reports summarizing major findings and recommendations. Descriptive statistics were used to present number of hospital trusts, interviewees, professions, disciplines, workload and costs.
resultsAll 22 hospital trusts in Norway participated in the A&F conducted October 2017 to April 2019. Altogether, 446 leaders and healthcare workers were interviewed: 110 leaders, 336 health professionals of whom 89 were antimicrobial stewardship team members. Median number of days from audits were performed till reporting were 36 (IQR 30-49). Median workload for auditors per visit was 7 days (6-8). Total costs were €133 952. Main audit findings were that ASP structures were established in most hospital trusts, but leadership commitment and implementation of interventions were often lacking. The hospital trusts received feedback on establishing governance structures, setting local targets, implementing interventions and increased involvement of nurses.
conclusionsNationwide A&F provides a unique and comprehensive insight into the implementation of ASPs in hospitals and is feasible with a reasonable amount of resources. This approach can identify targets for improved implementation of ASPs in hospitals.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.