Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38628373›Full record

ArticleAntimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE2024

Positive effects of audit and feedback on antimicrobial use in hospitalized patients limited to audited patients.

Elske M Engel-Dettmers, Nashwan Al Naiemi, Hero E Dijkema, Annemarie L M A Braakman-Jansen, Lisette J E W C van Gemert-Pijnen, Bhanu Sinha

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. 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

6 authors.

Elske M Engel-DettmersFaculty of Behavioral, Management and Social Sciences, Psychology, Health and Technology, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0002-6836-6212
Nashwan Al NaiemiDepartment of Medical Microbiology, Labmicta, Hengelo, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0176-9853
Hero E DijkemaDepartment of Urology, ZGT, Almelo and Hengelo, The Netherlands.
Annemarie L M A Braakman-JansenFaculty of Behavioral, Management and Social Sciences, Psychology, Health and Technology, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6430-3946
Lisette J E W C van Gemert-PijnenFaculty of Behavioral, Management and Social Sciences, Psychology, Health and Technology, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6511-7240
Bhanu SinhaDepartment of Medical Microbiology and Infection Prevention, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1634-0010

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: Audit and feedback is an antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) strategy, with the potential to also optimize antimicrobial use in non-audited patients. This study aimed to determine whether audit and feedback reduce antimicrobial use in both audited and non-audited patients. Design: Before-after trial with a 1-year intervention period and 2.5-year historical cohort. Setting: 750-bed community hospital in the Netherlands. Patients: All patients admitted to the urology wards during the 3.5-year study period were observed. Patients were classified as using antimicrobials if any antimicrobial was used for therapeutic reasons. Patients using antimicrobials prophylactically were excluded from measurements. Intervention: The AMS team provided audit and feedback on antimicrobial use for patients using antimicrobials for 2 days. Retrospectively, antimicrobial use and length of stay (LOS) were compared with the historical cohort. Results: Audits modified antimicrobial treatment in 52.8% of the cases. De-escalating, stopping, and switching from intravenous to oral treatment accounted for 72% of these modifications. Compared to patients from the cohort, who also used antimicrobials for 2 days, antimicrobial use decreased from 14.21 DDD/patient (95% CI, 13.08-15.34) to 11.45 DDD/patient (95% CI, 8.26-14.64; Conclusions: Audit and feedback reduce antimicrobial use and LOS, but only for audited patients. Positive effects are not automatically transferred to patients for whom no audits have been performed.

Identifiers

PMID38628373
PMCPMC11019582

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.