Antimicrobial resistance control in the emergency department: a need for concrete improvement.
Antibiotic use
Antimicrobial resistance
Emergency department
Infection prevention and control
Journal
Antimicrobial resistance and infection control
ISSN: 2047-2994
Titre abrégé: Antimicrob Resist Infect Control
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101585411
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
08 07 2022
08 07 2022
Historique:
received:
23
12
2021
accepted:
29
06
2022
entrez:
8
7
2022
pubmed:
9
7
2022
medline:
14
7
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Rational use of antibiotics (AB) and infection prevention and control (IPC) are key measures for reducing antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in healthcare. Nonetheless, transferring evidence into clinical practice in emergency medicine has proven difficult. The extent to which structural requirements for implementing AMR control exist in German emergency departments (ED) was determined in a survey. Aspects of antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) and IPC implementation were surveyed within the German Association for Emergency Medicine (Deutsche Gesellschaft interdisziplinäre Notfall- und Akutmedizin e.V, DGINA) in 2018. Data were collected using an anonymous online questionnaire on ED characteristics, ED-based-link personnel for IPC and AMS, education and training, process monitoring and specific requirements for AMS and IPC as availability of AMR data and alcohol-based hand rub (AHR) consumption data. Data were analysed descriptively. 66 EDs with in median [interquartile range (IQR)] of 30,900 [23,000; 40,000] patient visits participated in the survey. EDs' healthcare worker (HCW) received regular training on hand hygiene (HH) in 67% and on AMS in 20% of EDs. Surveillance of AHR consumption was performed by 73% EDs, surveillance of AB consumption by 64%. Regular audits on HH were performed in 39%. Training and audit activities, showed no significant variations according to EDs' organizational characteristics. HCWs received immediate feedback of HH performance in 29%, in 23% a regular structured feedback of HH was provided. ED-based physicians with (1) specific IPC responsibilities and training were available in 61%, with (2) AMS training and responsibility in 15%. 83% had ED based IPC link nurses with precise ICP responsibilities in place. Essentially resistance data existed at the hospital level (74%) rather than at ED- or regional level (15% and 14% respectively). Management of AMR varies in German EDs, especially in accordance to hospital size and level of emergency care. IPC seems to receive more attention than AMS. Our data indicate the need for more implementation of regular IPC and AMS training in connection with monitoring and feedback in German EDs.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Rational use of antibiotics (AB) and infection prevention and control (IPC) are key measures for reducing antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in healthcare. Nonetheless, transferring evidence into clinical practice in emergency medicine has proven difficult. The extent to which structural requirements for implementing AMR control exist in German emergency departments (ED) was determined in a survey.
METHODS
Aspects of antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) and IPC implementation were surveyed within the German Association for Emergency Medicine (Deutsche Gesellschaft interdisziplinäre Notfall- und Akutmedizin e.V, DGINA) in 2018. Data were collected using an anonymous online questionnaire on ED characteristics, ED-based-link personnel for IPC and AMS, education and training, process monitoring and specific requirements for AMS and IPC as availability of AMR data and alcohol-based hand rub (AHR) consumption data. Data were analysed descriptively.
RESULTS
66 EDs with in median [interquartile range (IQR)] of 30,900 [23,000; 40,000] patient visits participated in the survey. EDs' healthcare worker (HCW) received regular training on hand hygiene (HH) in 67% and on AMS in 20% of EDs. Surveillance of AHR consumption was performed by 73% EDs, surveillance of AB consumption by 64%. Regular audits on HH were performed in 39%. Training and audit activities, showed no significant variations according to EDs' organizational characteristics. HCWs received immediate feedback of HH performance in 29%, in 23% a regular structured feedback of HH was provided. ED-based physicians with (1) specific IPC responsibilities and training were available in 61%, with (2) AMS training and responsibility in 15%. 83% had ED based IPC link nurses with precise ICP responsibilities in place. Essentially resistance data existed at the hospital level (74%) rather than at ED- or regional level (15% and 14% respectively).
CONCLUSIONS
Management of AMR varies in German EDs, especially in accordance to hospital size and level of emergency care. IPC seems to receive more attention than AMS. Our data indicate the need for more implementation of regular IPC and AMS training in connection with monitoring and feedback in German EDs.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35804401
doi: 10.1186/s13756-022-01135-6
pii: 10.1186/s13756-022-01135-6
pmc: PMC9264623
doi:
Substances chimiques
Anti-Bacterial Agents
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
94Commentaires et corrections
Type : ErratumIn
Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
Eur J Emerg Med. 2015 Oct;22(5):338-42
pubmed: 24999671
Lancet Infect Dis. 2017 Sep;17(9):990-1001
pubmed: 28629876
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2009 May;30(5):415-9
pubmed: 19344264
Clin Microbiol Infect. 2021 Feb;27(2):204-209
pubmed: 33144202
Acute Med Surg. 2018 Jul 30;5(4):374-379
pubmed: 30338085
Ann Emerg Med. 2013 Jul;62(1):69-77.e2
pubmed: 23122955
Australas Emerg Care. 2020 Jun;23(2):105-113
pubmed: 31810897
Pediatrics. 2019 Feb;143(2):
pubmed: 30622156
Injury. 2017 Jan;48(1):165-170
pubmed: 27568844
BMC Infect Dis. 2013 Aug 07;13:367
pubmed: 23919402
Lancet Infect Dis. 2010 Mar;10(3):167-75
pubmed: 20185095
Int J Infect Dis. 2015 Apr;33:205-8
pubmed: 25722282
Acad Emerg Med. 2006 Mar;13(3):331-3
pubmed: 16514124
Ger Med Sci. 2017 Aug 01;15:Doc10
pubmed: 28794694
Dan Med J. 2012 Dec;59(12):A4545
pubmed: 23290285
BMJ. 2013 Mar 11;346:f1493
pubmed: 23479660
World J Emerg Surg. 2018 Jun 28;13:27
pubmed: 29988647
Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2011;105(10):734-42
pubmed: 22176982
Am J Infect Control. 2016 Nov 1;44(11):1203-1207
pubmed: 27160981
J Hosp Infect. 2019 Aug;102(4):394-406
pubmed: 30935982
West J Emerg Med. 2014 May;15(3):282-9
pubmed: 24868305
Soc Sci Med. 2012 Feb;74(3):348-355
pubmed: 21444137
BMJ Qual Saf. 2016 May;25(5):372-8
pubmed: 26232494
Emerg Med Clin North Am. 2018 Nov;36(4):873-887
pubmed: 30297010
Am J Infect Control. 2017 Oct 1;45(10):1064-1068
pubmed: 28754223
Ann Emerg Med. 2014 Mar;63(3):340-50.e1
pubmed: 24120627
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2009 Jun;30(6):578-80
pubmed: 19419325
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2017 Jul;38(7):870-872
pubmed: 28560930
Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz. 2016 Sep;59(9):1189-220
pubmed: 27558147
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2017 Apr;38(4):469-475
pubmed: 28173888
Lancet Infect Dis. 2019 Jan;19(1):56-66
pubmed: 30409683
Sci Rep. 2020 May 18;10(1):8194
pubmed: 32424172
Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz. 2023 Mar;66(3):332-351
pubmed: 36802229
Nat Microbiol. 2019 Nov;4(11):1919-1929
pubmed: 31358985