ArticleAntimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE2025
Antimicrobial prescribing quality in Australian emergency departments: an analysis of the Hospital NAPS data set.
Article in Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Appropriateness of antibiotic selection at emergency department discharge and risk of 30-day adverse events in patients with acute exacerbation of COPD.Revista espanola de quimioterapia : publicacion oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Quimioterapia · 2026Observational
- Impact of a post-prescription audit and feedback antimicrobial stewardship intervention on inappropriate carbapenem prescribing: an interrupted time series analysis.JAC-antimicrobial resistance · 2025Article
- Antifungal use and appropriateness: a study of Australian Hospital National Antimicrobial Prescribing Survey data.Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To analyze antimicrobial prescribing practices in Australian emergency departments (ED), identifying prescribing areas requiring improvement. This aims to inform antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) strategies to enhance antimicrobial prescribing quality. Design: Retrospective analysis of the Hospital National Antimicrobial Prescribing Survey (NAPS) data set. Setting: EDs in public and private Australian hospitals (n = 652). Participants: Hospitals (n = 652) that participated in the Hospital NAPS from 2013 to 2022. Methods: Data were collected by trained auditors from participating hospitals with the use of a standardized auditing tool, the Hospital NAPS. Data from 2013 to 2022 were analyzed descriptively. Variables assessed included guideline compliance and appropriateness by antimicrobial and indication, and reasons for inappropriateness. Results: There were 3,098 antimicrobial prescriptions from EDs included for analysis. Guideline compliance (63.5%) and appropriateness (70.4%) in EDs were lower compared to overall prescribing practices from all departments. The most commonly prescribed antimicrobial was ceftriaxone (16.9%, n = 523), and the most common indication was empiric prescribing for community-acquired pneumonia (16.0%, n = 497). Amoxicillin-clavulanic acid (53.2%, n = 99), and acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (54.3%, n = 57), were the antimicrobial and indication with the lowest rates of appropriateness respectively. Ceftriaxone prescribing also had a low rate of appropriateness (62.3%, n = 326). Selection of antimicrobials with too broad of a spectrum was the most common reason for inappropriateness (40.2%). Conclusion: Antimicrobial prescribing quality in EDs warrants improvement. Recommended targets for AMS interventions are the excessive and inappropriate use of broad-spectrum antimicrobials such as ceftriaxone and amoxicillin-clavulanic acid in common respiratory and urinary tract infections.
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.