Development and implementation of the Antimicrobial Stewardship Intervention Scoring Tool at a single pediatric institution

Ann L. Wirtz, Alaina N. Burns, Elizabeth Monsees, Brian R. Lee, Joshua C. Herigon
{"title":"Development and implementation of the Antimicrobial Stewardship Intervention Scoring Tool at a single pediatric institution","authors":"Ann L. Wirtz, Alaina N. Burns, Elizabeth Monsees, Brian R. Lee, Joshua C. Herigon","doi":"10.1017/ice.2024.114","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<span>Objective:</span><p>The primary objective was to grade the potential impact of antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP) interventions on patient safety at a single center using a newly developed scoring tool, the Antimicrobial Stewardship Impact Scoring Tool (ASIST).</p><span>Design:</span><p>Retrospective descriptive study.</p><span>Setting:</span><p>A 367-bed free-standing, pediatric academic medical center.</p><span>Methods:</span><p>The ASP team developed the ASIST which scored each intervention on an impact level (low, moderate, high) based on patient harm avoidance and degree of antibiotic optimization. Intervention frequency and characteristics were collected between May 1, 2022 and October 31, 2023. Intervention rates per impact level were calculated monthly.</p><span>Results:</span><p>The ASP team made 1024 interventions further classified as low (45.1%), moderate (47%), and high impact (7.9%). The interventions for general pediatrics (53.9%) and those to modify formulation (62.2%), dose/frequency (58.1%), and duration (57.5%) were frequently low impact. Hematology/oncology (12.5%), sub-specialty (11.7%), and surgical services (11.3%) had the greatest rate of high-impact interventions. Interventions to broaden antibiotics (40.8%) and those associated with antibiotics used to treat bacteremia (20.6%) were frequently classified as high-impact.</p><span>Conclusion:</span><p>The ASIST is an effective tool to link ASP interventions to prevention of antimicrobial-associated patient harm. For our ASP team, it provided meaningful data to present to hospital leadership and identified opportunities to prevent future harm and reduce ASP team workload.</p>","PeriodicalId":13558,"journal":{"name":"Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology","volume":"9 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ice.2024.114","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective:

The primary objective was to grade the potential impact of antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP) interventions on patient safety at a single center using a newly developed scoring tool, the Antimicrobial Stewardship Impact Scoring Tool (ASIST).

Design:

Retrospective descriptive study.

Setting:

A 367-bed free-standing, pediatric academic medical center.

Methods:

The ASP team developed the ASIST which scored each intervention on an impact level (low, moderate, high) based on patient harm avoidance and degree of antibiotic optimization. Intervention frequency and characteristics were collected between May 1, 2022 and October 31, 2023. Intervention rates per impact level were calculated monthly.

Results:

The ASP team made 1024 interventions further classified as low (45.1%), moderate (47%), and high impact (7.9%). The interventions for general pediatrics (53.9%) and those to modify formulation (62.2%), dose/frequency (58.1%), and duration (57.5%) were frequently low impact. Hematology/oncology (12.5%), sub-specialty (11.7%), and surgical services (11.3%) had the greatest rate of high-impact interventions. Interventions to broaden antibiotics (40.8%) and those associated with antibiotics used to treat bacteremia (20.6%) were frequently classified as high-impact.

Conclusion:

The ASIST is an effective tool to link ASP interventions to prevention of antimicrobial-associated patient harm. For our ASP team, it provided meaningful data to present to hospital leadership and identified opportunities to prevent future harm and reduce ASP team workload.

在一家儿科机构开发并实施抗菌药物管理干预评分工具
目的:主要目的是使用新开发的评分工具--抗菌药物管理影响评分工具(ASIST),对一个中心的抗菌药物管理计划(ASP)干预措施对患者安全的潜在影响进行评分。方法:抗菌药物管理计划团队开发了抗菌药物管理影响评分工具,该工具根据避免对患者造成伤害的程度和抗生素优化程度,对每项干预措施的影响等级(低、中、高)进行评分。在 2022 年 5 月 1 日至 2023 年 10 月 31 日期间收集了干预频率和特征。结果:ASP 团队进行了 1024 次干预,进一步分为低影响(45.1%)、中影响(47%)和高影响(7.9%)。普通儿科(53.9%)的干预措施以及修改配方(62.2%)、剂量/频率(58.1%)和持续时间(57.5%)的干预措施通常影响较小。血液学/肿瘤学(12.5%)、亚专科(11.7%)和外科服务(11.3%)的高影响干预率最高。结论:ASIST 是将 ASP 干预措施与预防抗菌药物相关性患者伤害联系起来的有效工具。对于我们的 ASP 团队来说,它提供了有意义的数据,可以提交给医院领导层,并确定了预防未来伤害和减少 ASP 团队工作量的机会。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信