Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34522879›Full record

ArticleInfection prevention in practice2021

Antibiotic prescribing practices in general surgery: a mixed methods quality improvement project.

Georgia Lamb, Georgina Phillips, Esmita Charani, Alison Holmes, Giovanni Satta

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Infection prevention in practice, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Antibiotic Stewardship in Surgical Departments.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Learning from pragmatic local research.Infection prevention in practice · 2021
    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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Georgia LambImperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK.
Georgina PhillipsImperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK.
Esmita CharaniImperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK.
Alison HolmesNIHR Health Protection Research Unit in Healthcare Associated Infections and AMR and Centre for Antimicrobial Optimisation, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Giovanni SattaImperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK.
Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust · GBImperial College London · GBNIHR Imperial Biomedical Research Centre · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA single pre-operative antibiotic dose provides optimal prophylaxis against surgical site infection (SSI), but significant variability persists in adherence to prophylaxis guidelines. We describe a quality improvement project aiming to improve guideline-driven antibiotic prescribing within surgical teams at a tertiary hospital.

methodsFace-to-face interviews with surgical teams and anonymous surveys of senior surgeons and anaesthetists were used to collect qualitative data on the perceptions and attitudes of prescribers. This informed intervention development, including a daily ward-round checklist using the acronymous 'ABBDDOMM', from A (antibiotics) to M (microbiology), combined with education and heightened guideline accessibility. A first audit cycle was performed for patients undergoing intra-abdominal surgery during a two-month period (cycle one). Post-implementation data were collected 12 months later (cycle two).

findingsInterviews provided insight into common themes and barriers surrounding antibiotic prescribing, whilst surveys explored future solutions to these barriers. In cycle one, 100/205 (48.8%) patients received extended antibiotics beyond the single-dose prophylaxis. Following intervention, only 41/138 (29.7%) patients received extended antibiotic courses, demonstrating a 21.5% reduction in prolonged antibiotics (P<0.0005). In cycle one, 107/205 patients (52.2%) received antibiotics compliant with Trust Guidelines, compared to 80/138 (58.0%) in cycle two.

conclusionOur proposed checklist, alongside antimicrobial stewardship education, prompts daily review of important patient parameters and results to significantly reduce inappropriate post-operative antibiotic prescribing. Promoting the sustained use of similar checklists by junior doctors and focusing on measures to improve uptake of pre-operative induction antibiotic guidelines is required to achieve further benefits.

Indexed as

Antibiotic decision-makingAntibiotic prophylaxisChecklistQuality improvementSurgery

Identifiers

PMID34522879
PMCPMC8426558
OpenAlexW3194961640

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.