抗菌药物管理战略的实施和影响在急性护理脊髓损伤和疾病单位。

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Journal of Spinal Cord Medicine Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2023-11-20 DOI:10.1080/10790268.2023.2277963
Ashley M Hughes, Charlesnika T Evans, Cara Ray, Harveen Kaur, Margaret A Fitzpatrick, Amanda Vivo, Ayokunle A Olagoke, Geneva M Wilson, Katie J Suda
{"title":"抗菌药物管理战略的实施和影响在急性护理脊髓损伤和疾病单位。","authors":"Ashley M Hughes, Charlesnika T Evans, Cara Ray, Harveen Kaur, Margaret A Fitzpatrick, Amanda Vivo, Ayokunle A Olagoke, Geneva M Wilson, Katie J Suda","doi":"10.1080/10790268.2023.2277963","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Context: </strong>Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs (ASPs) are crucial to optimizing antibiotic use. ASPs are implemented in the Veterans Health Administration (VAs), but they do not target the needs of populations at high risk for resistant infections, such as spinal cord injury and disorder (SCI/D).</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The goal of this study was to assess key ASP leader and SCI/D clinicians' perceived level of implementation and impact of 33 Antimicrobial Stewardship (AS) strategies.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>SCI/D clinicians and ASP leaders across 24 VA facilities with SCI/D units were surveyed. Participants rated their perceived level of impact (\"high\", \"mild\", \"low\") and perceived level of implementation (\"not\", \"partially\", \"fully\") for 33 AS strategies in SCI/D units in VAs. Strategies were grouped into core elements which they support. We conducted a Fisher's exact test to assess differences between respondent perceptions based on role (SCI/D clinicians versus ASP leaders).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>AS strategy implementation varied across VA facilities. Of the AS strategies, pre-authorization was perceived to be highly impactful (78%) and fully implemented (82%). SCI/D clinicians and ASP leaders rated AS strategies differently such that SCI/D clinicians were less aware of implementation of AS strategies related to reporting requirements; further, SCI/D clinicians rated strategies which guide treatment duration and which limit <i>C. difficile</i> antibiotic exposure as more impactful than ASP leaders. Ratings for facility-wide and SCI/D unit ratings did not significantly differ for impact or implementation.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Implementation practices varied across VA facilities. Future work should implement highly impactful AS strategies according to facility and unit needs.</p>","PeriodicalId":50044,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Spinal Cord Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"112-128"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11748977/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Antimicrobial stewardship strategy implementation and impact in acute care spinal cord injury and disorder units.\",\"authors\":\"Ashley M Hughes, Charlesnika T Evans, Cara Ray, Harveen Kaur, Margaret A Fitzpatrick, Amanda Vivo, Ayokunle A Olagoke, Geneva M Wilson, Katie J Suda\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10790268.2023.2277963\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Context: </strong>Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs (ASPs) are crucial to optimizing antibiotic use. ASPs are implemented in the Veterans Health Administration (VAs), but they do not target the needs of populations at high risk for resistant infections, such as spinal cord injury and disorder (SCI/D).</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The goal of this study was to assess key ASP leader and SCI/D clinicians' perceived level of implementation and impact of 33 Antimicrobial Stewardship (AS) strategies.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>SCI/D clinicians and ASP leaders across 24 VA facilities with SCI/D units were surveyed. Participants rated their perceived level of impact (\\\"high\\\", \\\"mild\\\", \\\"low\\\") and perceived level of implementation (\\\"not\\\", \\\"partially\\\", \\\"fully\\\") for 33 AS strategies in SCI/D units in VAs. Strategies were grouped into core elements which they support. We conducted a Fisher's exact test to assess differences between respondent perceptions based on role (SCI/D clinicians versus ASP leaders).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>AS strategy implementation varied across VA facilities. Of the AS strategies, pre-authorization was perceived to be highly impactful (78%) and fully implemented (82%). SCI/D clinicians and ASP leaders rated AS strategies differently such that SCI/D clinicians were less aware of implementation of AS strategies related to reporting requirements; further, SCI/D clinicians rated strategies which guide treatment duration and which limit <i>C. difficile</i> antibiotic exposure as more impactful than ASP leaders. Ratings for facility-wide and SCI/D unit ratings did not significantly differ for impact or implementation.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Implementation practices varied across VA facilities. Future work should implement highly impactful AS strategies according to facility and unit needs.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50044,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Spinal Cord Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"112-128\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11748977/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Spinal Cord Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10790268.2023.2277963\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/11/20 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Spinal Cord Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10790268.2023.2277963","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:抗菌药物管理计划(asp)是优化抗生素使用的关键。asp是在退伍军人健康管理局(VAs)实施的,但它们并没有针对耐药感染高风险人群的需求,例如脊髓损伤和疾病(SCI/D)。目的:本研究的目的是评估关键ASP领导者和SCI/D临床医生对33种抗菌药物管理(AS)策略的实施和影响的感知水平。方法:对24家设有SCI/D单元的VA机构的SCI/D临床医生和ASP负责人进行调查。参与者对他们在VAs的SCI/D单元中的33种AS策略的感知影响水平(“高”、“轻度”、“低”)和感知实施水平(“不”、“部分”、“完全”)进行了评分。战略被分成它们所支持的核心要素。我们进行了Fisher精确测试,以评估基于角色(SCI/D临床医生与ASP领导者)的受访者感知差异。结果:AS策略的实施在VA设施中有所不同。在AS策略中,预授权被认为是非常有效的(78%)和完全实施的(82%)。SCI/D临床医生和ASP领导者对AS策略的评价不同,因此SCI/D临床医生较少意识到与报告要求相关的AS策略的实施;此外,SCI/D临床医生认为指导治疗时间和限制艰难梭菌抗生素暴露的策略比ASP领导者更有影响力。全设施评分和SCI/D单位评分在影响或实施方面没有显著差异。结论:各个VA设施的实施实践各不相同。未来的工作应根据设施和单位的需要实施高度有效的AS策略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Antimicrobial stewardship strategy implementation and impact in acute care spinal cord injury and disorder units.

Context: Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs (ASPs) are crucial to optimizing antibiotic use. ASPs are implemented in the Veterans Health Administration (VAs), but they do not target the needs of populations at high risk for resistant infections, such as spinal cord injury and disorder (SCI/D).

Objective: The goal of this study was to assess key ASP leader and SCI/D clinicians' perceived level of implementation and impact of 33 Antimicrobial Stewardship (AS) strategies.

Method: SCI/D clinicians and ASP leaders across 24 VA facilities with SCI/D units were surveyed. Participants rated their perceived level of impact ("high", "mild", "low") and perceived level of implementation ("not", "partially", "fully") for 33 AS strategies in SCI/D units in VAs. Strategies were grouped into core elements which they support. We conducted a Fisher's exact test to assess differences between respondent perceptions based on role (SCI/D clinicians versus ASP leaders).

Results: AS strategy implementation varied across VA facilities. Of the AS strategies, pre-authorization was perceived to be highly impactful (78%) and fully implemented (82%). SCI/D clinicians and ASP leaders rated AS strategies differently such that SCI/D clinicians were less aware of implementation of AS strategies related to reporting requirements; further, SCI/D clinicians rated strategies which guide treatment duration and which limit C. difficile antibiotic exposure as more impactful than ASP leaders. Ratings for facility-wide and SCI/D unit ratings did not significantly differ for impact or implementation.

Conclusion: Implementation practices varied across VA facilities. Future work should implement highly impactful AS strategies according to facility and unit needs.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Spinal Cord Medicine
Journal of Spinal Cord Medicine 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
5.90%
发文量
101
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: For more than three decades, The Journal of Spinal Cord Medicine has reflected the evolution of the field of spinal cord medicine. From its inception as a newsletter for physicians striving to provide the best of care, JSCM has matured into an international journal that serves professionals from all disciplines—medicine, nursing, therapy, engineering, psychology and social work.
期刊最新文献
Epidemiological profile of people with spinal cord injury in Ecuador: A population-based design and cohort profile. Examining motivators and barriers to meditation practice among individuals with spinal cord injury: Insights from a survey study. Indications, feasibility safety and efficacy of dorsal rhizotomy at the level of the conus medullaris (conus deafferentation) in individuals with spinal cord injury. Predicting motor recovery in tetraplegia during inpatient rehabilitation by motor unit action potentials and stimulated manual motor testing. Readability assessment of patient education materials on autonomic dysreflexia.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1