Antibiotic prophylaxis in cesarean section: use of cost per case comparison to influence prescribing practices.

Hospital formulary Pub Date : 1993-03-01
B Weir
{"title":"Antibiotic prophylaxis in cesarean section: use of cost per case comparison to influence prescribing practices.","authors":"B Weir","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Results of a previously conducted DUE revealed that 91% of obstetric patients received antibiotic prophylaxis with cefoxitin despite the existence of obstetric department guidelines recommending the use of cefazolin. In the present DUE, antibiotic selection in C-section prophylaxis was reviewed and individual prescribers, both compliant and noncompliant with guidelines, were identified. Over a 2-month period, physicians who prescribed other than cefazolin for C-section prophylaxis were issued \"Dear Doctor\" letters, reminding them of existing guidelines. A significant change in prescribing patterns following this intervention was not demonstrated. A multidisciplinary approach was then undertaken. Prescribers were stratified by number of procedures, antibiotic requested, and antibiotic cost per case (average and median). Results were reviewed with Co-chiefs of Ob/Gyn. Letters to both compliant and noncompliant prescribers were issued. A grand rounds presentation describing the results of the DUE was also given. A follow-up review showed that the conversion to cefazolin prophylaxis reached 80%, with accompanied extrapolated yearly cost avoidance of nearly $5,500.</p>","PeriodicalId":76912,"journal":{"name":"Hospital formulary","volume":"28 3","pages":"285-6, 289-90"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1993-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hospital formulary","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","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

Results of a previously conducted DUE revealed that 91% of obstetric patients received antibiotic prophylaxis with cefoxitin despite the existence of obstetric department guidelines recommending the use of cefazolin. In the present DUE, antibiotic selection in C-section prophylaxis was reviewed and individual prescribers, both compliant and noncompliant with guidelines, were identified. Over a 2-month period, physicians who prescribed other than cefazolin for C-section prophylaxis were issued "Dear Doctor" letters, reminding them of existing guidelines. A significant change in prescribing patterns following this intervention was not demonstrated. A multidisciplinary approach was then undertaken. Prescribers were stratified by number of procedures, antibiotic requested, and antibiotic cost per case (average and median). Results were reviewed with Co-chiefs of Ob/Gyn. Letters to both compliant and noncompliant prescribers were issued. A grand rounds presentation describing the results of the DUE was also given. A follow-up review showed that the conversion to cefazolin prophylaxis reached 80%, with accompanied extrapolated yearly cost avoidance of nearly $5,500.

剖宫产术中的抗生素预防:利用个案成本比较影响处方做法。
先前进行的DUE结果显示,尽管存在产科指南建议使用头孢唑林,但91%的产科患者接受了头孢西丁的抗生素预防。在目前的DUE中,对剖腹产预防中的抗生素选择进行了审查,并确定了符合和不符合指南的个体处方者。在2个月的时间里,那些开头孢唑林以外的剖腹产预防处方的医生都收到了“亲爱的医生”的信,提醒他们注意现有的指导方针。没有证据表明干预后处方模式发生了显著变化。然后采取了多学科办法。处方者按手术次数、抗生素要求和每例抗生素费用(平均和中位数)进行分层。结果与妇产科联合主任进行了审查。给合规和不合规的处方者都发了信。会议还对DUE的结果作了详尽的介绍。一项后续审查显示,改用头孢唑林预防的比例达到80%,由此推断每年可节省近5500美元的费用。
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