Diese Seite wurde automatisch übersetzt und die Genauigkeit der Übersetzung wird nicht garantiert. Bitte wende dich an die englische Version für einen Quelltext.

Antibiotic Stewardship in Small Hospitals (SCORE)

7. August 2017 aktualisiert von: Eddie Stenehjem, Intermountain Health Care, Inc.

Impact of Implementing Antibiotic Stewardship Programs in 15 Small Hospitals: A Cluster-Randomized Trial Intervention

Core elements of effective antibiotic stewardship programs (ASPs) have been identified and evidence-based guidelines have been developed for implementation. The majority of the evidence used for these guidelines are from published studies on the effectiveness of ASPs in large academic or large community hospitals. A significant portion of healthcare in the United States, however, takes place in small hospitals. In 2015, 73% of US hospitals had < 200 beds (4,057 hospitals) and accounted for 29% of all US inpatient bed days. Limited studies on the effectiveness of antibiotic stewardship implementation have been performed in hospitals with < 200 beds. Antibiotic use rates and selection patterns in these small hospitals are similar to that of large hospitals and the majority of small hospitals lack formal ASP that meet the CDC's core elements. The objective of this real-world implementation study was to assess the effectiveness of three ASP strategies of escalating intensity designed specifically for small hospitals within a vertically integrated healthcare delivery system.

Studienübersicht

Status

Abgeschlossen

Bedingungen

Intervention / Behandlung

Detaillierte Beschreibung

The investigators designed a clustered randomized controlled intervention to evaluate 3 antibiotic stewardship strategies designed for small hospitals. Each hospital was randomized to one of three ASP interventions with increasing levels of intensity and intervention (Programs 1, 2, 3). The investigators felt that clinical equipoise about the effect of ASPs did not exist and randomizing to a no-intervention group was unacceptable. Antibiotic use was compared within each group before and after the intervention. In keeping with other real-world implementation studies, secondary analyses were planned to include an interrupted time series design to evaluate the impact of each strategy. Randomization of hospitals was stratified based on patient volume. Hospital administration and clinical leadership were not blinded to which ASP program they were randomly assigned to, but there were no public announcements. The intervention started March 2014 and ended June 2015.

Studientyp

Interventionell

Einschreibung (Tatsächlich)

30000

Phase

  • Unzutreffend

Teilnahmekriterien

Forscher suchen nach Personen, die einer bestimmten Beschreibung entsprechen, die als Auswahlkriterien bezeichnet werden. Einige Beispiele für diese Kriterien sind der allgemeine Gesundheitszustand einer Person oder frühere Behandlungen.

Zulassungskriterien

Studienberechtigtes Alter

  • Kind
  • Erwachsene
  • Älterer Erwachsener

Akzeptiert gesunde Freiwillige

Nein

Studienberechtigte Geschlechter

Alle

Beschreibung

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Intermountain Healthcare acute care hospital with < 200 licensed beds
  • No formal antibiotic stewardship program in place

Exclusion Criteria:

-All Intermountain Healthcare specialty hospitals, regardless of bed size

Studienplan

Dieser Abschnitt enthält Einzelheiten zum Studienplan, einschließlich des Studiendesigns und der Messung der Studieninhalte.

Wie ist die Studie aufgebaut?

Designdetails

  • Hauptzweck: Versorgungsforschung
  • Zuteilung: Zufällig
  • Interventionsmodell: Parallele Zuordnung
  • Maskierung: Keine (Offenes Etikett)

Waffen und Interventionen

Teilnehmergruppe / Arm
Intervention / Behandlung
Aktiver Komparator: Program 1
Implementation of a basic antibiotic stewardship program focusing on education, access to Infectious Diseases physicians, and availability of antibiotic use data.
Verhalten: Program 1
Program 1 hospitals received a basic curriculum and tools for implementation of basic antibiotic stewardship interventions. Hospitals required an indication for every antibiotic order. A daily email was sent to a designated email account when a patient had been on an antibiotic for >48 hours. Curriculum included implementing antibiotic time-outs, IV to PO conversion, indications, evaluating for bug-drug mismatches, and recommendations on when to call the Infectious Diseases (ID) hotline. A daily antibiotic stewardship check list was created. All materials were provided to all pharmacists and remained on-site. Clinicians had access to an ID telephone hotline to answer clinical questions. Pharmacy directors and hospital leadership were provided a monthly, hospital-specific, antibiotic use dashboard. All pharmacy directors and staff received a monthly newsletter.
Aktiver Komparator: Program 2
This arm increases antibiotic stewardship education and interventions. Program 2 hospitals performed audit and feedback of pre-specified antibiotics and implemented locally controlled restrictions.
Verhalten: Program 2
Program 2 hospitals received all the interventions of Program 1. In addition, Program 2 hospitals received more intense antibiotic stewardship education. Educational topics included audit and feedback, antibiotic de-escalation, the need for antibiotics targeting anaerobic bacteria, antibiotic allergy verification, and antibiotic restrictions. Pharmacists in Program 2 hospitals reviewed patients on vancomycin, piperacillin/tazobactam, imipenem, meropenem, and cefepime. For patients receiving one of these antibiotics, pharmacists reviewed the patients' microbiology data to identify opportunities for antibiotic de-escalation, IV to PO conversion, bug-drug mismatches, and/or indications for calling the ID hotline. Program 2 hospitals also restricted daptomycin, linezolid, imipenem, meropenem, ceftaroline, tigecycline, and all mold active antifungals. In Program 2 hospitals, the local pharmacy staff pre-authorized restricted antibiotics based on defined criteria.
Aktiver Komparator: Program 3
This arm was the most intensive antibiotic stewardship intervention. It included signficant audit and feedback, ID controlled restrictions, and ID review of designated culture/lab results.
Verhalten: Program 3
Program 3 hospitals received all the interventions of Program 1 and Program 2. In addition, pharmacists in program 3 hospitals reviewed an expanded list of antibiotics for audit and feedback. These antibiotics included: Vancomycin, piperacillin/tazobactam, imipenem, meropenem, cefepime, ertapenem, aminoglycosides, ceftriaxone, and fluoroquinolones. Program 3 hospitals implemented the same antibiotic restrictions as Program 2 but ID pharmacists controlled pre-authorization of restricted antibiotics. In addition, an ID physician reviewed pre-specified positive cultures (e.g. all positive blood cultures, cultures with highly resistant Enterobacteraciae) and contacted providers with recommendations as needed. ID physician review occurred Monday through Friday and alerts were batched daily at 6am.

Was misst die Studie?

Primäre Ergebnismessungen

Ergebnis Maßnahme
Maßnahmenbeschreibung
Zeitfenster
Total antibiotic use
Zeitfenster: Total antibiotic use during the 15 months of Intervention (April 1, 2014 through June 30th 2015) was compared to the antibiotic use during the 12 month baseline period (Jan 1 through Dec 31 2013).
Evaluated change in total antibiotic use between the baseline and intervention periods while accounting for the cluster randomized design.
Total antibiotic use during the 15 months of Intervention (April 1, 2014 through June 30th 2015) was compared to the antibiotic use during the 12 month baseline period (Jan 1 through Dec 31 2013).

Sekundäre Ergebnismessungen

Ergebnis Maßnahme
Maßnahmenbeschreibung
Zeitfenster
Broad spectrum antibiotic use
Zeitfenster: Broad spectrum antibiotic use during the 15 months of Intervention (April 1, 2014 through June 30th 2015) was compared to the broad spectrum antibiotic use during the 12 month baseline period (Jan 1 through Dec 31 2013).
Evaluated change in broad spectrum antibiotic use between the baseline and intervention periods
Broad spectrum antibiotic use during the 15 months of Intervention (April 1, 2014 through June 30th 2015) was compared to the broad spectrum antibiotic use during the 12 month baseline period (Jan 1 through Dec 31 2013).
Restricted antibiotic use
Zeitfenster: Restricted antibiotic use during the 15 months of Intervention (April 1, 2014 through June 30th 2015) was compared to the restricted antibiotic use during the 12 month baseline period (Jan 1 through Dec 31 2013).
Evaluated change in restricted antibiotic use between the baseline and intervention periods
Restricted antibiotic use during the 15 months of Intervention (April 1, 2014 through June 30th 2015) was compared to the restricted antibiotic use during the 12 month baseline period (Jan 1 through Dec 31 2013).
30-day readmission
Zeitfenster: 30-day readmission rate during the 15 months of Intervention (April 1, 2014 through June 30th 2015) was compared to the 30-day readmission rate during the 12 month baseline period (Jan 1 through Dec 31 2013).
Evaluated change in 30 day readmission rates between the baseline and intervention periods
30-day readmission rate during the 15 months of Intervention (April 1, 2014 through June 30th 2015) was compared to the 30-day readmission rate during the 12 month baseline period (Jan 1 through Dec 31 2013).
30-day mortality
Zeitfenster: 30-day mortality rate during the 15 months of Intervention (April 1, 2014 through June 30th 2015) was compared to the 30-day mortality rate during the 12 month baseline period (Jan 1 through Dec 31 2013).
Evaluated change in 30 day mortality rates between the baseline and intervention periods
30-day mortality rate during the 15 months of Intervention (April 1, 2014 through June 30th 2015) was compared to the 30-day mortality rate during the 12 month baseline period (Jan 1 through Dec 31 2013).
Hospital length of stay
Zeitfenster: Average hospital length of stay during the 15 months of Intervention (April 1, 2014 through June 30th 2015) was compared to the average hospital length of stay during the 12 month baseline period (Jan 1 through Dec 31 2013).
Evaluated change in hospital length of stay between the baseline and intervention periods
Average hospital length of stay during the 15 months of Intervention (April 1, 2014 through June 30th 2015) was compared to the average hospital length of stay during the 12 month baseline period (Jan 1 through Dec 31 2013).
Clostridium difficile
Zeitfenster: C. difficile rate during the 15 months of Intervention (April 1, 2014 through June 30th 2015) was compared to the C. difficile rate during the 12 month baseline period (Jan 1 through Dec 31 2013).
Evaluated change in Clostridium difficile incidence between the baseline and intervention periods
C. difficile rate during the 15 months of Intervention (April 1, 2014 through June 30th 2015) was compared to the C. difficile rate during the 12 month baseline period (Jan 1 through Dec 31 2013).

Mitarbeiter und Ermittler

Hier finden Sie Personen und Organisationen, die an dieser Studie beteiligt sind.

Sponsor

Intermountain Health Care, Inc.

Publikationen und hilfreiche Links

Die Bereitstellung dieser Publikationen erfolgt freiwillig durch die für die Eingabe von Informationen über die Studie verantwortliche Person. Diese können sich auf alles beziehen, was mit dem Studium zu tun hat.

Allgemeine Veröffentlichungen

Nützliche Links

Studienaufzeichnungsdaten

Diese Daten verfolgen den Fortschritt der Übermittlung von Studienaufzeichnungen und zusammenfassenden Ergebnissen an ClinicalTrials.gov. Studienaufzeichnungen und gemeldete Ergebnisse werden von der National Library of Medicine (NLM) überprüft, um sicherzustellen, dass sie bestimmten Qualitätskontrollstandards entsprechen, bevor sie auf der öffentlichen Website veröffentlicht werden.

Haupttermine studieren

Studienbeginn (Tatsächlich)

1. Juli 2013

Primärer Abschluss (Tatsächlich)

1. Juni 2015

Studienabschluss (Tatsächlich)

1. Juni 2015

Studienanmeldedaten

Zuerst eingereicht

3. August 2017

Zuerst eingereicht, das die QC-Kriterien erfüllt hat

7. August 2017

Zuerst gepostet (Tatsächlich)

10. August 2017

Studienaufzeichnungsaktualisierungen

Letztes Update gepostet (Tatsächlich)

10. August 2017

Letztes eingereichtes Update, das die QC-Kriterien erfüllt

7. August 2017

Zuletzt verifiziert

1. August 2017

Mehr Informationen

Begriffe im Zusammenhang mit dieser Studie

Andere Studien-ID-Nummern

  • 1024823

Plan für individuelle Teilnehmerdaten (IPD)

Planen Sie, individuelle Teilnehmerdaten (IPD) zu teilen?

Nein

Beschreibung des IPD-Plans

N/A. No individual patient level data available.

Arzneimittel- und Geräteinformationen, Studienunterlagen

Studiert ein von der US-amerikanischen FDA reguliertes Arzneimittelprodukt

Nein

Studiert ein von der US-amerikanischen FDA reguliertes Geräteprodukt

Nein

Produkt, das in den USA hergestellt und aus den USA exportiert wird

Nein

Diese Informationen wurden ohne Änderungen direkt von der Website clinicaltrials.gov abgerufen. Wenn Sie Ihre Studiendaten ändern, entfernen oder aktualisieren möchten, wenden Sie sich bitte an register@clinicaltrials.gov. Sobald eine Änderung auf clinicaltrials.gov implementiert wird, wird diese automatisch auch auf unserer Website aktualisiert .

Klinische Studien zur Antibiotika-Stewardship

Klinische Studien zur Program 1

Suchen Sie nach ähnlichen Studien

Sponsoren und Mitarbeiter

Krankheiten

Drogeninterventionen

CROs by country

CROs in Israel

Bedingungen

Seltene Krankheiten

Drogeninterventionen

Nahrungsergänzungsmittel

Sponsor / Mitarbeiter

Standorte

3
Abonnieren