Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-8kt4b Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-30T16:12:57.575Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Survey to determine the relative importance of clinical factors used to make empiric antibiotic decisions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2020

Casey Kim
Affiliation:
Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Julia E. Szymczak
Affiliation:
Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Informatics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Erin M. Schnellinger
Affiliation:
Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Informatics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
David J. Herman
Affiliation:
ID Care, Hillsborough, New Jersey Princeton Medical Center, Princeton, New Jersey
Leigh A. Kennedy
Affiliation:
Division of Infectious Diseases, Pennsylvania Hospital, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Naasha J. Talati
Affiliation:
Division of Infectious Diseases, Penn Presbyterian Medical Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Keith W. Hamilton*
Affiliation:
Division of Infectious Diseases, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
*
Author for correspondence: Keith W. Hamilton, E-mail: keith.hamilton@pennmedicine.upenn.edu

Abstract

A cross-sectional survey study of inpatient prescribers in a university health system was performed to assess the importance they place on different clinical risk factors when making empiric antibiotic decisions. Our findings show that these clinical risk factors were weighted differently based on the clinical scenario and the type of prescriber.

Type
Concise Communication
Copyright
© 2020 by The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America. All rights reserved.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Gaieski, DF, Mikkelsen, ME, Band, RA, et al. Impact of time to antibiotics on survival in patients with severe sepsis or septic shock in whom early goal-directed therapy was initiated in the emergency department. Crit Care Med 2010;38:10451053.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spivak, ES, Cosgrove, SE, Srinivasan, A. Measuring appropriate antimicrobial use: attempts at opening the black box. Clin Infect Dis 2016;63:16391644.Google ScholarPubMed
Davey, P, Brown, E, Charani, E, et al. Interventions to improve antibiotic prescribing practices for hospital inpatients. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2 2017;CD003543.Google ScholarPubMed
Blumenthal, KG, Lu, N, Zhang, Y, et al. Risk of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and Clostridium difficile in patients with a documented penicillin allergy: population-based matched cohort study. BMJ 2018;361:k2400.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Macy, E, Contreras, R. Health care use and serious infection prevalence associated with penicillin “allergy” in hospitalized patients: a cohort study. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2014;133:790796.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chow, AL, Ang, A, Chow, CZ, et al. Implementation hurdles of an interactive, integrated, point-of-care computerised decision support system for hospital antibiotic prescription. Int J Antimicrob Agents 2016;47:132139.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rawson, TM, Moore, LSP, Hernandez, B, et al. A systematic review of clinical decision support systems for antimicrobial management: are we failing to investigate these interventions appropriately? Clin Microbiol Infect 2017;23:524532.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Salsgiver, E, Bernstein, D, Simon, MS, et al. Knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding antimicrobial use and stewardship among prescribers at acute-care hospitals. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2018;39:316322.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sanchez, GV, Hersh, AL, Shapiro, DJ, Cawley, JF, Hicks, LA. Outpatient antibiotic prescribing among United States nurse practitioners and physician assistants. OpenForum Infect Dis 2016;3:ofw168.Google ScholarPubMed
Supplementary material: PDF

Kim et al. supplementary material

Kim et al. supplementary material

Download Kim et al. supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 72.6 KB