MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2899531781 · doi:10.1097/ccm.0000000000003514

Long-Term Effects of Phased Implementation of Antimicrobial Stewardship in Academic ICUs: 2007–2015*

2018· article· en· W2899531781 on OpenAlexaffabout
Andrew M. Morris, Anthony D. Bai, Lisa Burry, Linda Dresser, Niall D. Ferguson, Stephen E. Lapinsky, Neil M. Lazar, Mark McIntyre, John Matelski, Brian Minnema, Katie Mok, Sandra B. Nelson, Susan M. Poutanen, Jeffrey M. Singh, Miranda So, Marilyn Steinberg, Chaim M. Bell

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Care Medicine · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicAntibiotic Use and Resistance
Canadian institutionsNorth York General HospitalSinai Health SystemUniversity of TorontoQueen's UniversityUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAntimicrobial stewardshipMedicineAntimicrobialDefined daily doseIntensive care unitEmergency medicineIntensive care medicineAntibiotic resistanceAntibioticsNursingMedical prescription

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Antimicrobial stewardship is advocated to reduce antimicrobial resistance in ICUs by reducing unnecessary antimicrobial consumption. Evidence has been limited to short, single-center studies. We evaluated whether antimicrobial stewardship in ICUs could reduce antimicrobial consumption and costs. DESIGN: We conducted a phased, multisite cohort study of a quality improvement initiative. SETTING: Antimicrobial stewardship was implemented in four academic ICUs in Toronto, Canada beginning in February 2009 and ending in July 2012. PATIENTS: All patients admitted to each ICU from January 1, 2007, to December 31, 2015, were included. INTERVENTIONS: Antimicrobial stewardship was delivered using in-person coaching by pharmacists and physicians three to five times weekly, and supplemented with unit-based performance reports. Total monthly antimicrobial consumption (measured by defined daily doses/100 patient-days) and costs (Canadian dollars/100 patient-days) before and after antimicrobial stewardship implementation were measured. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 239,123 patient-days (57,195 patients) were analyzed, with 148,832 patient-days following introduction of antimicrobial stewardship. Antibacterial use decreased from 120.90 to 110.50 defined daily dose/100 patient-days following introduction of antimicrobial stewardship (adjusted intervention effect -12.12 defined daily dose/100 patient-days; 95% CI, -16.75 to -7.49; p < 0.001) and total antifungal use decreased from 30.53 to 27.37 defined daily doses/100 patient-days (adjusted intervention effect -3.16 defined daily dose/100 patient-days; 95% CI, -8.33 to 0.04; p = 0.05). Monthly antimicrobial costs decreased from $3195.56 to $1998.59 (adjusted intervention effect -$642.35; 95% CI, -$905.85 to -$378.84; p < 0.001) and total antifungal costs were unchanged from $1771.86 to $2027.54 (adjusted intervention effect -$355.27; 95% CI, -$837.88 to $127.33; p = 0.15). Mortality remained unchanged, with no consistent effects on antimicrobial resistance and candidemia. CONCLUSIONS: Antimicrobial stewardship in ICUs with coaching plus audit and feedback is associated with sustained improvements in antimicrobial consumption and cost. ICUs with high antimicrobial consumption or expenditure should consider implementing antimicrobial stewardship programs.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.634

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.351 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations44
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical Care MedicineSame topicAntibiotic Use and ResistanceFrench-language works237,207