ArticleCureus2026
Impact of Prospective Audit and Feedback Antimicrobial Stewardship Strategy: A Retrospective Analysis in a Tertiary Hospital in Colombia.
Article in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Antimicrobial stewardship programs are fundamental strategies for improving prescribing practices. In Colombia, evidence of their impact is limited. Objective The objective of this study was to ascertain the role of antimicrobial therapy change, as an intervention of the antimicrobial stewardship programme, as an audit strategy, in the period from January to July 2024 in a tertiary care hospital in Colombia, Hospital Universitario San Rafael de Tunja. Methods Patients, including adults over 18 years, were evaluated through an audit-and-feedback stewardship strategy, while data analysis was retrospectively collected. Patients who died, were discharged, or were referred before the antimicrobial stewardship programme team intervention were excluded. Clinical, microbiological, and therapeutic characteristics, duration of treatment, and adherence to the antimicrobial stewardship programme's recommendations were analysed. Results A total of 487 patients were included in the study, with a median age of 59 years and a male-to-female ratio of 53.8% to 46.2%. The primary diagnosis was urinary tract infection, accounting for 27.7% of cases. Piperacillin/tazobactam was the most commonly used empirical antimicrobial. Following the implementation of the antimicrobial stewardship programme at the hospital in January 2024, treatment was adjusted in 78.2% of cases, with de-escalation (37.8%) and stepwise escalation (37.6%) predominating. Following the interventions by the antimicrobial stewardship group, 92.2% of prescribers demonstrated overall compliance. Targeted treatment was significantly shorter in patients who underwent intervention (median: 5 days) compared to those who did not (7 days; p < 0.001). The 30-day readmission rate was 19.1%, with no significant differences between groups. Conclusions The implementation of antimicrobial stewardship programmes enabled the optimisation of antimicrobial therapy through individualised adjustments, achieving high adherence and a reduction in treatment duration, supporting the role of antimicrobial stewardship programmes as a key strategy for improving prescription quality. However, prospective studies are needed to evaluate its long-term clinical, microbiological, and economic impact.
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.