Nursing and Antimicrobial Stewardship:An Unacknowledged and Underutilized Focal Point
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Nurses have the ability to play an important role in patient safety related to antibiotic use and overuse but are often not involved in antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASP). Therefore, nurses need to be educated and trained in antimicrobial stewardship (AS) so that they can more competently contribute to safe patient care. Lewin’s change theory may be utilized as a framework for understanding the integration of nurses into these efforts. Objective of the Study: This integrative review is intended to explore the role of nurses in AS and discuss the importance of nurses needing to be educated, trained, and competent in this so that they can become more actively involved in such programs. Methodology: Articles were gathered from the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), PubMed, and Google Scholar from June 2015 to December 2019. A five-year time frame was implemented to ensure that the most current information was included. Seventeen peer reviewed, written in English, original research studies that met the inclusion criteria (from the original 107 studies) and conducted in Australia, Canada, Scotland, South Africa, and the United States were included in this review. Results: The identified 17 recent studies focused on nursing and AS. Six major themes emerged, including nurses’ competency requirements and training related to AS, antimicrobial knowledge and educational gaps, perceived role of the nurse, nurses’ attitudes toward antimicrobial use, nurse and provider perspectives on ASPs, and nurses’ valuable contributions to AS. Discussion: This integrative review found that including nurses in AS would benefit ASPs and that finding ways for facilities to organize and implement such efforts is vital. This ties into the first stage of Lewin’s change theory of “unfreezing” and recognizing that the current (or old) way of practicing is in need of change. The literature reviewed provides evidence that nurses have the capacity to be an integral part of any ASPs and that they can help combat antimicrobial resistance in myriad ways when provided the necessary training and education. All studies reviewed found positive aspects to having nurse representation. However, there are gaps in antimicrobial based knowledge on the part of the nurses. Limitations: The limitations of this integrative review include the fact that the publications used were limited to a five-year timeframe and came specifically from nursing journals or have at least one nurse author contributor. Also, the current review included five international studies where the nurses’ scope and standards of practice may be different from those in the United States. A search of the grey literature reports related to AS was not conducted and could have provided additional valuable information as well. Conclusion and Recommendations: Nursing participation is needed in all ASPs. Empowering and educating nurses to feel confident and competent in this role will help to mitigate the overuse and misuse of antimicrobials. The ASPs most likely vary from institution to institution and future research should provide a framework for how to best disseminate information to nurses. Keywords: Antimicrobial Stewardship, Antibiotic Training, Nurses
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,012 | 0,040 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,011 | 0,016 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,005 |
| Communication savante | 0,010 | 0,013 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,005 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».