ArticleInfection2026
Antimicrobial Stewardship in German non-university hospitals: baseline status and impact of a multifaceted AMS intervention within the prospective ID ROLL OUT study.
Article in Infection, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Performance of a clinical decision-support tool on empirical antibiotic treatment in the emergency department: a retrospective study.JAC-antimicrobial resistance · 2026Article
- [Requirements for the rational use of antibiotics based on antibiotic stewardship].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
21 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeNon-university hospitals are the major provider of inpatient care in Germany, but the extent of antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) activities in this sector is not well known. We aimed to evaluate the implementation of AMS in ten non-university hospitals in Germany.
methodsA pre-existing French score covering key AMS categories (structures, resources and actions) was adapted to the German AMS guidelines and named AMS-GER score. The score was assessed before, during and after the implementation of a bundle of AMS measures. The bundle was implemented as part of the ID ROLL OUT study - a multicentre pre-post interventional study in non-university hospitals in Germany.
resultsAt baseline, the median AMS-GER score was 37% (range 20-60%), indicating poor implementation in 9 out of 10 hospitals. The intervention resulted in a significant score improvement to 76% (range: 62-86%, p < 0.001). At the one-year follow-up after the intervention, the AMS-GER score had decreased in all hospitals (median: -13 percentage points (range: 48-80%, p = 0.015)). Hospitals with ongoing full-time AMS/ID staffing (4/10 hospitals) experienced a smaller decrease ( - 13 percentage points) than those without ( - 32 percentage points in 6/10 hospitals).
conclusionRoutine integration of AMS in a large sample of non-university hospitals in Germany is low but can be significantly improved by targeted interventions. The decline in the AMS-GER score in the follow-up phase-particularly in hospitals lacking ongoing AMS/ID staffing-highlights the need for sustained staffing and systematic benchmarking. In this context, the AMS-GER score offers a structured tool for AMS monitoring in German hospitals.
Indexed as
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.