A complex ePrescribing antimicrobial stewardship-based (ePAMS+) intervention for hospitals: mixed-methods feasibility trial results.
Bacteriology
Decision support
Health informatics
Infectious diseases
Microbiology
Journal
BMC medical informatics and decision making
ISSN: 1472-6947
Titre abrégé: BMC Med Inform Decis Mak
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088682
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
11 Oct 2024
11 Oct 2024
Historique:
received:
16
01
2024
accepted:
01
10
2024
medline:
12
10
2024
pubmed:
12
10
2024
entrez:
11
10
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Antibiotic resistant infections cause over 700,000 deaths worldwide annually. As antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) helps minimise the emergence of antibiotic resistance resulting from inappropriate use of antibiotics in healthcare, we developed ePAMS+ (ePrescribing-based Anti-Microbial Stewardship), an ePrescribing and Medicines Administration (EPMA) system decision-support tool complemented by educational, behavioural and organisational elements. We conducted a non-randomised before-and-after feasibility trial, implementing ePAMS+ in two English hospitals using the Cerner Millennium EPMA system. Wards of several specialties were included. Patient participants were blinded to whether ePAMS+ was in use; prescribers were not. A mixed-methods evaluation aimed to establish: acceptability and usability of ePAMS+ and trial processes; feasibility of ePAMS+ implementation and quantitative outcome recording; and a Fidelity Index measuring the extent to which ePAMS+ was delivered as intended. Longitudinal semi-structured interviews of doctors, nurses and pharmacists, alongside non-participant observations, gathered qualitative data; we extracted quantitative prescribing data from the EPMA system. Normal linear modelling of the defined daily dose (DDD) of antibiotic per admission quantified its variability, to inform sample size calculations for a future trial of ePAMS+ effectiveness. The research took place during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, from April 2021 to November 2022. 60 qualitative interviews were conducted (33 before ePAMS+ implementation, 27 after). 1,958 admissions (1,358 before ePAMS+ implementation; 600 after) included 24,884 antibiotic orders. Qualitative interviews confirmed that some aspects of ePAMS+ , its implementation and training were acceptable, while other features (e.g. enabling combinations of antibiotics to be prescribed) required further development. ePAMS+ uptake was low (28 antibiotic review records from 600 admissions; 0.047 records per admission), preventing full development of a Fidelity Index. Normal linear modelling of antibiotic DDD per admission showed a residual variance of 1.086 (log-transformed scale). Unavailability of indication data prevented measurement of some outcomes (e.g. number of antibiotic courses per indication). This feasibility trial encountered unforeseen circumstances due to contextual factors and a global pandemic, highlighting the need for careful adaptation of complex intervention implementations to the local setting. We identified key refinements to ePAMS+ to support its wider adoption in clinical practice, requiring further piloting before a confirmatory effectiveness trial. ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN13429325, 24 March 2022.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Antibiotic resistant infections cause over 700,000 deaths worldwide annually. As antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) helps minimise the emergence of antibiotic resistance resulting from inappropriate use of antibiotics in healthcare, we developed ePAMS+ (ePrescribing-based Anti-Microbial Stewardship), an ePrescribing and Medicines Administration (EPMA) system decision-support tool complemented by educational, behavioural and organisational elements.
METHODS
METHODS
We conducted a non-randomised before-and-after feasibility trial, implementing ePAMS+ in two English hospitals using the Cerner Millennium EPMA system. Wards of several specialties were included. Patient participants were blinded to whether ePAMS+ was in use; prescribers were not. A mixed-methods evaluation aimed to establish: acceptability and usability of ePAMS+ and trial processes; feasibility of ePAMS+ implementation and quantitative outcome recording; and a Fidelity Index measuring the extent to which ePAMS+ was delivered as intended. Longitudinal semi-structured interviews of doctors, nurses and pharmacists, alongside non-participant observations, gathered qualitative data; we extracted quantitative prescribing data from the EPMA system. Normal linear modelling of the defined daily dose (DDD) of antibiotic per admission quantified its variability, to inform sample size calculations for a future trial of ePAMS+ effectiveness.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The research took place during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, from April 2021 to November 2022. 60 qualitative interviews were conducted (33 before ePAMS+ implementation, 27 after). 1,958 admissions (1,358 before ePAMS+ implementation; 600 after) included 24,884 antibiotic orders. Qualitative interviews confirmed that some aspects of ePAMS+ , its implementation and training were acceptable, while other features (e.g. enabling combinations of antibiotics to be prescribed) required further development. ePAMS+ uptake was low (28 antibiotic review records from 600 admissions; 0.047 records per admission), preventing full development of a Fidelity Index. Normal linear modelling of antibiotic DDD per admission showed a residual variance of 1.086 (log-transformed scale). Unavailability of indication data prevented measurement of some outcomes (e.g. number of antibiotic courses per indication).
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
This feasibility trial encountered unforeseen circumstances due to contextual factors and a global pandemic, highlighting the need for careful adaptation of complex intervention implementations to the local setting. We identified key refinements to ePAMS+ to support its wider adoption in clinical practice, requiring further piloting before a confirmatory effectiveness trial.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
BACKGROUND
ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN13429325, 24 March 2022.
Identifiants
pubmed: 39394550
doi: 10.1186/s12911-024-02707-9
pii: 10.1186/s12911-024-02707-9
doi:
Substances chimiques
Anti-Bacterial Agents
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
301Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
O’Neill J. Review on antimicrobial resistance. Antimicrobial Resistance: Tackling a Crisis for the Health and Wealth of Nations; 2014.
Goossens H, Ferech M, Vander Stichele R, Elseviers M, Group EP. Outpatient antibiotic use in Europe and association with resistance: a cross-national database study. Lancet. 2005;365(9459):579–87.
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)17907-0
pubmed: 15708101
Holmes AH, Moore LS, Sundsfjord A, Steinbakk M, Regmi S, Karkey A, Guerin PJ, Piddock LJ. Understanding the mechanisms and drivers of antimicrobial resistance. Lancet. 2016;387(10014):176–87.
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)00473-0
pubmed: 26603922
European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. Summary of the latest data on antibiotic consumption in the European Union. Stockholm: ESAC-Net surveillance data; 2017.
English surveillance programme for antimicrobial utilisation and resistance (ESPAUR): Report 2020 to 2021. London; 2021.
Rabbi F, Banfield L, Munir M, Chagla Z, Mayhew A, de Souza R. Overprescription of antibiotics for treating hospitalized COVID-19 patients: a systematic review & meta-analysis. Heliyon. 2023;9(10):e20563.
doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e20563
pubmed: 37876436
pmcid: 10590847
ESPAUR SSTF Implementation subgroup. Start Smart - Then Focus. London: Antimicrobial Stewardship Toolkit for English Hospitals; 2015.
Ashiru-Oredope D, Sharland M, Charani E, McNulty C, Cooke J. Improving the quality of antibiotic prescribing in the NHS by developing a new Antimicrobial Stewardship Programme: Start Smart—Then Focus. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2012;67:i51–63.
doi: 10.1093/jac/dks202
pubmed: 22855879
NHS England: Commissioning for Quality and Innovation (CQUIN) Guidance for 2017–2019. 10.National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Antimicrobial stewardship: systems and processes for effective antimicrobial medicine use. NICE guideline [NG15]. 2015.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Antimicrobial stewardship: systems and processes for effective antimicrobial medicine use. NICE guideline [NG15]. 2015
Cresswell K, Mozaffar H, Shah S, Sheikh A. Approaches to promoting the appropriate use of antibioticsthrough hospital electronic prescribing systems: a scoping review. Int J Pharm Pract. 2017;25:5–17.
doi: 10.1111/ijpp.12274
pubmed: 27198585
King A, Cresswell KM, Coleman JJ, Pontefract SK, Slee A, Williams R, Sheikh A. Investigating the ways in which health information technology can promote antimicrobial stewardship: a conceptual overview. J R Soc Med. 2017;110(8):320–9.
doi: 10.1177/0141076817722049
pubmed: 28730922
Weir CJ, Adamestam I, Sharp R, Ennis H, Heed A, Williams R, Cresswell K, Dogar O, Pontefract SK, Coleman J, et al. A complex ePrescribing-based anti-microbial stewardship (ePAMS+) intervention for hospitals combining technological and behavioural components: protocol for a feasibility trial. Pilot Feasibility Stud. 2023;9:18.
doi: 10.1186/s40814-022-01230-w
pubmed: 36709308
Cross ELA, Sivyer K, Islam J, Santillo M, Mowbray F, Peto TEA, Walker AS, Yardley L, Llewelyn MJ. Adaptation and implementation of the ARK (Antibiotic Review Kit) intervention to safely and substantially reduce antibiotic use in hospitals: a feasibility study. J Hosp Infect. 2019;103(3):268–75.
doi: 10.1016/j.jhin.2019.07.017
pubmed: 31394146
Hoffmann T, Glasziou P, Boutron I, Milne R, Perera R, Moher D, Altman D, Barbour V, Macdonald H, Johnston M, et al. Better reporting of interventions: template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide. BMJ Open. 2014;348:g1687.
doi: 10.1136/bmj.g1687
pubmed: 24609605
Mureyi D, Cresswell K, Sivyer K, Heed A, Weir CJ, Adamestam I, Sharp R, Ennis H, Dogar O, Pontefract S et al: The development of a complex digital and behavioural Antimicrobial Stewardship intervention for hospitals in England. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 2024 (under peer review). Preprint: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3715230/v1
Saunders B, Sim J, Kingstone T, Baker S, Waterfield J, Bartlam B, Burroughs H, Jinks C. Saturation in qualitative research: exploring its conceptualization and operationalization. Qual Quant. 2018;52:1893–907.
doi: 10.1007/s11135-017-0574-8
pubmed: 29937585
Azungah T. Qualitative research: deductive and inductive approaches to data analysis. Qual Res J. 2018;18(4):383–400.
doi: 10.1108/QRJ-D-18-00035
Joffe H, Yardley L. Content and thematic analysis. In: Marks DF, Yardley L, editors. Research Methods for Clinical and Health Psychology. London: SAGE Publications; 2003. p. 55–68.
Cresswell K, Williams R, Sheikh A. Developing and applying a formative evaluation framework for health information technology implementations: qualitative investigation. J Med Internet Res. 2020;22(6):e15068.
doi: 10.2196/15068
pubmed: 32519968
Our seasons https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/weather/learn-about/met-office-for-schools/other-content/other-resources/our-seasons Accessed 5 July 2024.
Borrelli B, Sepinwall D, Ernst D, Bellg AJ, Czajkowski S, Breger R, DeFrancesco C, Levesque C, Sharp DL, Ogedegbe G, et al. A new tool to assess treatment fidelity and evaluation of treatment fidelity across 10 years of health behavior research. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2005;73(5):852–60.
doi: 10.1037/0022-006X.73.5.852
pubmed: 16287385
Peters DH, Tran NT, Adam T: Implementation research in health: a practical guide. Geneva; 2013.
Eldridge SM, Chan CL, Campbell MJ, Bond CM, Hopewell S, Thabane L, Lancaster GA, group; obotPc: CONSORT,. statement: extension to randomised pilot and feasibility trials. Pilot Feasibility Stud. 2010;2016:2.
doi: 10.1186/s40814-016-0105-8
Operational Pressures Escalation Levels (OPEL) Framework 2023/24 https://www.england.nhs.uk/publication/operational-pressures-escalation-levels-opel-framework-2023-24/ Accessed 10 Jan 2024.
Ladenheim D, Cramp E, Patel N. Are current electronic prescribing systems facilitating antimicrobial stewardship in acute National Health Service Hospital Trusts in the East of England? J Hosp Infect. 2016;94(2):200–1.
doi: 10.1016/j.jhin.2016.07.017
pubmed: 27575656
Van Dort BA, Penm J, Ritchie A, Baysari MT. The impact of digital interventions on antimicrobial stewardship in hospitals: a qualitative synthesis of systematic reviews. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2022;77(7):1828–37.
doi: 10.1093/jac/dkac112
pubmed: 35388414
pmcid: 9244225
Cresswell K, Hinder S, Sheikh A, Pontefract S, Watson NW, Price D, Heed A, Coleman J, Ennis H, Beggs J, et al. ePrescribing-based antimicrobial stewardship practices in an English National Health Service Hospital: qualitative interview study among medical prescribers and pharmacists. JMIR Formative Res. 2023;7(1):e37863.
doi: 10.2196/37863
pubmed: 37279044
pmcid: 10282906
Cresswell KM, Mozaffar H, Lee L, Williams R, Sheikh A. Workarounds to hospital electronic prescribing systems: a qualitative study in English hospitals. BMJ Qual Saf. 2017;26(7):542–51.
doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2015-005149
pubmed: 27129493
Mozaffar H, Cresswell KM, Williams R, Bates DW, Sheikh A. Exploring the roots of unintended safety threats associated with the introduction of hospital ePrescribing systems and candidate avoidance and/or mitigation strategies: a qualitative study. BMJ Qual Saf. 2017;26(9):722–33.
doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2016-005879
pubmed: 28174319
Hermanowicz JC. The longitudinal qualitative interview. Qual Sociol. 2013;36:189–208.
doi: 10.1007/S11133-013-9247-7
Dogar O, Boehnke J, Lorencatto F, Sheldon T, Siddiqi K. Measuring fidelity to behavioural support delivery for smoking cessation and its association with outcomes. Addiction. 2020;115:368–80.
doi: 10.1111/add.14804
pubmed: 31496033
Pollock N, Williams R. Software and Organisations: The Biography of the Enterprise-Wide System - Or how SAP Conquered the World. Abingdon: Routledge; 2009.
https://bnf.nice.org.uk Accessed 26 Apr 2023.