Document Server@UHasselt >
Research publications >
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title: ||ESGAP inventory of target indicators assessing antibiotic prescriptions: a cross-sectional survey|
|Authors: ||Howard, Philip|
Kofteridis, Diamantis P.
Pardo, Jose Pano
|Issue Date: ||2017|
|Publisher: ||OXFORD UNIV PRESS|
|Citation: ||JOURNAL OF ANTIMICROBIAL CHEMOTHERAPY, 72(10), p. 2910-2914|
|Abstract: ||Background: A variety of indicators is commonly used to monitor antibiotic prescriptions as part of national antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) programmes. Objectives: To make an inventory of indicators that assess antibiotic prescriptions and are linked to specific targets and incentives, at a national level. Methods: A cross-sectional survey (three-item questionnaire) was conducted in 2017 among all ESGAP (ESCMID Study Group for Antimicrobial stewardshiP) members, coming from 23 European countries and 16 non-European countries. Results: Almost all (20/23, 87%) European countries belonging to the ESGAP network participated, as well as one non-European country. Computerized systems routinely linking antibiotic prescriptions to clinical diagnoses were reported for only two countries (Turkey and Croatia). Only 6/21 (29%) countries had national indicators with both clear targets and incentives (Bulgaria, Croatia, France, the Netherlands, Norway and Portugal). We identified a total of 21 different indicators used in these countries, 16 concerning inpatients (9 quality indicators and 7 quantity metrics) and 8 concerning outpatients (all quantity metrics); some indicators were used in both settings. Three types of incentives were used: financing mechanism, hospitals' accreditation and public reporting. Some respondents reported that such indicators with both clear targets and incentives were used at a regional level in their country (e.g. Andalusia in Spain and England in the UK). Conclusions: National indicators, with clear targets and incentives, are not commonly used in Europe and we observed wide variations between countries regarding the selected indicators, the units of measure and the chosen targets.|
|Notes: ||[Howard, Philip] Leeds Teaching Hosp NHS Trust, Leeds, W Yorkshire, England. [Huttner, Benedikt] Geneva Univ Hosp, Div Infect Dis, Geneva, Switzerland. [Huttner, Benedikt] Geneva Univ Hosp, Infect Control Program, Geneva, Switzerland. [Huttner, Benedikt] Univ Geneva, Fac Med, Geneva, Switzerland. [Beovic, Bojana] Univ Ljubljana, Univ Med Ctr Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia. [Beovic, Bojana] Univ Ljubljana, Fac Med, Ljubljana, Slovenia. [Beraud, Guillaume] Ctr Hosp Poitiers, Med Interne & Malad Infect, Poitiers, France. [Beraud, Guillaume] Univ Droit & Sante Lille 2, EA 2694, Lille, France. [Beraud, Guillaume] Hasselt Univ, Interuniv Inst Biostat & Stat Bioinformat, Hasselt, Belgium. [Kofteridis, Diamantis P.] Univ Hosp Heraklion, Dept Internal Med, Infect Dis Unit, Iraklion, Greece. [Pardo, Jose Pano] Hosp Clin Univ Zaragoza, Serv Enfermedades Infecciosas, Zaragoza, Spain. [Schouten, Jeroen] Canisius Wilhelmina Hosp, Dept Intens Care, Nijmegen, Netherlands. [Pulcini, Celine] Univ Lorraine, EA APEMAC 4360, Nancy, France. [Pulcini, Celine] CHRU Nancy, Serv Malad Infect & Trop, Nancy, France.|
|ISI #: ||000411516200036|
|Type: ||Journal Contribution|
|Validation: ||ecoom, 2018|
|Appears in Collections: ||Research publications|
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.