Multicenter review of antimicrobial stewardship in the emergency department through pharmacist-led culture review and follow-up programs in Alberta.

IF 2.4
CJEM Pub Date : 2025-06-03 DOI:10.1007/s43678-025-00940-3
Ivy Nhan, Tracy Chin, Elissa Rennert-May, Thomas Brownlee, Micheal Guirguis, Irina Rajakumar
{"title":"Multicenter review of antimicrobial stewardship in the emergency department through pharmacist-led culture review and follow-up programs in Alberta.","authors":"Ivy Nhan, Tracy Chin, Elissa Rennert-May, Thomas Brownlee, Micheal Guirguis, Irina Rajakumar","doi":"10.1007/s43678-025-00940-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In some emergency departments (EDs), pharmacists review and follow-up on microbiological test results for recently discharged patients, intervening when empiric therapy is missing or inadequate to ensure appropriate antimicrobial use. Currently, this practice is not well described in Canada. Characterizing these ED pharmacist activities can help identify antimicrobial stewardship opportunities and allow for more tailored education and training.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The primary objective of this study was to describe culture review and follow-up pharmacy practice in terms of antimicrobial stewardship interventions. Secondary objectives included describing the types of cultures being managed and the antimicrobials prescribed empirically and post-culture review.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective chart review was conducted using pharmacist workload tracking documentation to identify patients with eligible cultures from six EDs in Alberta.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Three hundred cultures were included in this study, and one hundred twenty-nine interventions (40.7% of all cultures reviewed) were performed by ED pharmacists. Initiation of therapy was the most common (33.3%), followed by tailoring therapy (21.7%). Urine cultures were predominant (55.7%), and the antibiotics most prescribed, empirically, and post-culture for urine, were cefixime (44%) and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (34%), respectively. Five patients with asymptomatic bacteriuria were treated with antibiotics. Five patients with skin and soft tissue infections were treated with dual oral antibiotics when culture and sensitivity results indicated monotherapy would have been sufficient. Eight extra days of cefixime therapy were prescribed due to unaccounted doses administered in the ED.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study highlights the critical role of ED pharmacists in culture review and follow-up activities and their contributions to antimicrobial stewardship. By characterizing culture review and follow-up practices, several opportunities for minimizing unnecessary antimicrobial use were identified. These findings will help inform the development of targeted education and training programs to help strengthen the stewardship capabilities of ED pharmacists and prescribers.</p>","PeriodicalId":93937,"journal":{"name":"CJEM","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CJEM","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s43678-025-00940-3","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

Background: In some emergency departments (EDs), pharmacists review and follow-up on microbiological test results for recently discharged patients, intervening when empiric therapy is missing or inadequate to ensure appropriate antimicrobial use. Currently, this practice is not well described in Canada. Characterizing these ED pharmacist activities can help identify antimicrobial stewardship opportunities and allow for more tailored education and training.

Objectives: The primary objective of this study was to describe culture review and follow-up pharmacy practice in terms of antimicrobial stewardship interventions. Secondary objectives included describing the types of cultures being managed and the antimicrobials prescribed empirically and post-culture review.

Methods: A retrospective chart review was conducted using pharmacist workload tracking documentation to identify patients with eligible cultures from six EDs in Alberta.

Results: Three hundred cultures were included in this study, and one hundred twenty-nine interventions (40.7% of all cultures reviewed) were performed by ED pharmacists. Initiation of therapy was the most common (33.3%), followed by tailoring therapy (21.7%). Urine cultures were predominant (55.7%), and the antibiotics most prescribed, empirically, and post-culture for urine, were cefixime (44%) and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (34%), respectively. Five patients with asymptomatic bacteriuria were treated with antibiotics. Five patients with skin and soft tissue infections were treated with dual oral antibiotics when culture and sensitivity results indicated monotherapy would have been sufficient. Eight extra days of cefixime therapy were prescribed due to unaccounted doses administered in the ED.

Conclusion: This study highlights the critical role of ED pharmacists in culture review and follow-up activities and their contributions to antimicrobial stewardship. By characterizing culture review and follow-up practices, several opportunities for minimizing unnecessary antimicrobial use were identified. These findings will help inform the development of targeted education and training programs to help strengthen the stewardship capabilities of ED pharmacists and prescribers.

通过药剂师主导的文化审查和阿尔伯塔省的后续计划,对急诊科抗菌药物管理进行多中心审查。
背景:在一些急诊科(EDs),药剂师对最近出院患者的微生物检测结果进行审查和随访,当经验性治疗缺失或不足时进行干预,以确保适当的抗菌药物使用。目前,这种做法在加拿大并没有得到很好的描述。描述这些急诊科药剂师的活动可以帮助确定抗菌药物管理机会,并允许更有针对性的教育和培训。目的:本研究的主要目的是描述抗菌药物管理干预方面的培养回顾和随访药房实践。次要目标包括描述正在管理的培养类型以及经验性和培养后审查规定的抗菌剂。方法:回顾性图表回顾进行了药剂师工作量跟踪文件,以确定患者符合条件的培养在艾伯塔省六个急诊科。结果:本研究纳入300个培养,ED药剂师进行了129项干预(占所有审查培养的40.7%)。最常见的是开始治疗(33.3%),其次是定制治疗(21.7%)。尿培养占主导地位(55.7%),处方最多的抗生素,经验和尿培养后,分别是头孢克肟(44%)和甲氧苄啶-磺胺甲恶唑(34%)。5例无症状性菌尿患者采用抗生素治疗。当培养和敏感性结果表明单药治疗已经足够时,5例皮肤和软组织感染患者接受双口服抗生素治疗。结论:本研究强调了ED药剂师在培养审查和随访活动中的关键作用,以及他们对抗菌药物管理的贡献。通过特征培养审查和后续做法,确定了几个减少不必要的抗菌药物使用的机会。这些发现将有助于制定有针对性的教育和培训计划,以帮助加强ED药剂师和开处方者的管理能力。
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信