Behavioral approach to appropriate antimicrobial prescribing in hospitals the Dutch unique method for antimicrobial stewardship (DUMAS) participatory intervention study

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

IMPORTANCE Inappropriate antimicrobial prescribing leads to antimicrobial resistance and suboptimal clinical outcomes. Changing antimicrobial prescribing is a complex behavioral process that is not often taken into account in antimicrobial stewardship programs. OBJECTIVE To examine whether an antimicrobial stewardship approach grounded in behavioral theory and focusing on preserving prescriber autonomy and participation is effective in improving appropriateness of antimicrobial prescribing in hospitals. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS The Dutch Unique Method for Antimicrobial Stewardship (DUMAS) study was a prospective, stepped-wedge, participatory intervention study performed from October 1, 2011, through December 31, 2015. Outcomes were measured during a baseline period of 16 months and an intervention period of 12 months. The study was performed at 7 clinical departments (2 medical, 3 surgical, and 2 pediatric) in a tertiary care medical center and a general teaching hospital in the Netherlands. Physicians prescribing systemic antimicrobial drugs for any indication for patients admitted to the participating departments during the study period were included in the study. INTERVENTIONS We offered prescribers a free choice of how to improve their antimicrobial prescribing. Prescribers were stimulated to choose interventions with higher potential for success based on a root cause analysis of inappropriate prescribing. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Appropriateness of antimicrobial prescriptionswas determined using a validated approach based on guideline adherence and motivated guideline deviation and measured with repeated point prevalence surveys (6 per year). Appropriateness judgment was masked for the study period. Antimicrobial consumption was extracted from pharmacy records and measured as days of therapy per admission.We used linear and logistic mixed-model regression analysis to model outcomes over time. RESULTS A total of 1121 patient cases with 700 antimicrobial prescriptions were assessed during the baseline period and 882 patient cases with 531 antimicrobial prescriptions during the intervention period. The mean antimicrobial appropriateness increased from 64.1%at intervention start to 77.4%at 12-month follow-up (+13.3%; relative risk, 1.17; 95%CI, 1.04-1.27), without a change in slope. No decrease in antimicrobial consumption was found. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Use of a behavioral approach preserving prescriber autonomy resulted in an increase in antimicrobial appropriateness sustained for at least 12 months. The approach is inexpensive and could be easily transferable to various health care environments.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1130-1138
Number of pages9
JournalJAMA Internal Medicine
Volume177
Issue number8
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Aug 2017

Cite this

@article{7e99d88eb514481e88f4959e2de4ebc2,
title = "Behavioral approach to appropriate antimicrobial prescribing in hospitals the Dutch unique method for antimicrobial stewardship (DUMAS) participatory intervention study",
abstract = "IMPORTANCE Inappropriate antimicrobial prescribing leads to antimicrobial resistance and suboptimal clinical outcomes. Changing antimicrobial prescribing is a complex behavioral process that is not often taken into account in antimicrobial stewardship programs. OBJECTIVE To examine whether an antimicrobial stewardship approach grounded in behavioral theory and focusing on preserving prescriber autonomy and participation is effective in improving appropriateness of antimicrobial prescribing in hospitals. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS The Dutch Unique Method for Antimicrobial Stewardship (DUMAS) study was a prospective, stepped-wedge, participatory intervention study performed from October 1, 2011, through December 31, 2015. Outcomes were measured during a baseline period of 16 months and an intervention period of 12 months. The study was performed at 7 clinical departments (2 medical, 3 surgical, and 2 pediatric) in a tertiary care medical center and a general teaching hospital in the Netherlands. Physicians prescribing systemic antimicrobial drugs for any indication for patients admitted to the participating departments during the study period were included in the study. INTERVENTIONS We offered prescribers a free choice of how to improve their antimicrobial prescribing. Prescribers were stimulated to choose interventions with higher potential for success based on a root cause analysis of inappropriate prescribing. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Appropriateness of antimicrobial prescriptionswas determined using a validated approach based on guideline adherence and motivated guideline deviation and measured with repeated point prevalence surveys (6 per year). Appropriateness judgment was masked for the study period. Antimicrobial consumption was extracted from pharmacy records and measured as days of therapy per admission.We used linear and logistic mixed-model regression analysis to model outcomes over time. RESULTS A total of 1121 patient cases with 700 antimicrobial prescriptions were assessed during the baseline period and 882 patient cases with 531 antimicrobial prescriptions during the intervention period. The mean antimicrobial appropriateness increased from 64.1{\%}at intervention start to 77.4{\%}at 12-month follow-up (+13.3{\%}; relative risk, 1.17; 95{\%}CI, 1.04-1.27), without a change in slope. No decrease in antimicrobial consumption was found. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Use of a behavioral approach preserving prescriber autonomy resulted in an increase in antimicrobial appropriateness sustained for at least 12 months. The approach is inexpensive and could be easily transferable to various health care environments.",
author = "Sikkens, {Jonne J.} and {Van Agtmael}, {Michiel A.} and Peters, {Edgar J.G.} and Lettinga, {Kamilla D.} and {Van Der Kuip}, Martijn and Vandenbroucke-Grauls, {Christina M.J.E.} and Cordula Wagner and Kramer, {Mark H.H.}",
year = "2017",
month = "8",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1001/jamainternmed.2017.0946",
language = "English",
volume = "177",
pages = "1130--1138",
journal = "JAMA Internal Medicine",
issn = "2168-6106",
publisher = "American Medical Association",
number = "8",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Behavioral approach to appropriate antimicrobial prescribing in hospitals the Dutch unique method for antimicrobial stewardship (DUMAS) participatory intervention study

AU - Sikkens, Jonne J.

AU - Van Agtmael, Michiel A.

AU - Peters, Edgar J.G.

AU - Lettinga, Kamilla D.

AU - Van Der Kuip, Martijn

AU - Vandenbroucke-Grauls, Christina M.J.E.

AU - Wagner, Cordula

AU - Kramer, Mark H.H.

PY - 2017/8/1

Y1 - 2017/8/1

N2 - IMPORTANCE Inappropriate antimicrobial prescribing leads to antimicrobial resistance and suboptimal clinical outcomes. Changing antimicrobial prescribing is a complex behavioral process that is not often taken into account in antimicrobial stewardship programs. OBJECTIVE To examine whether an antimicrobial stewardship approach grounded in behavioral theory and focusing on preserving prescriber autonomy and participation is effective in improving appropriateness of antimicrobial prescribing in hospitals. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS The Dutch Unique Method for Antimicrobial Stewardship (DUMAS) study was a prospective, stepped-wedge, participatory intervention study performed from October 1, 2011, through December 31, 2015. Outcomes were measured during a baseline period of 16 months and an intervention period of 12 months. The study was performed at 7 clinical departments (2 medical, 3 surgical, and 2 pediatric) in a tertiary care medical center and a general teaching hospital in the Netherlands. Physicians prescribing systemic antimicrobial drugs for any indication for patients admitted to the participating departments during the study period were included in the study. INTERVENTIONS We offered prescribers a free choice of how to improve their antimicrobial prescribing. Prescribers were stimulated to choose interventions with higher potential for success based on a root cause analysis of inappropriate prescribing. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Appropriateness of antimicrobial prescriptionswas determined using a validated approach based on guideline adherence and motivated guideline deviation and measured with repeated point prevalence surveys (6 per year). Appropriateness judgment was masked for the study period. Antimicrobial consumption was extracted from pharmacy records and measured as days of therapy per admission.We used linear and logistic mixed-model regression analysis to model outcomes over time. RESULTS A total of 1121 patient cases with 700 antimicrobial prescriptions were assessed during the baseline period and 882 patient cases with 531 antimicrobial prescriptions during the intervention period. The mean antimicrobial appropriateness increased from 64.1%at intervention start to 77.4%at 12-month follow-up (+13.3%; relative risk, 1.17; 95%CI, 1.04-1.27), without a change in slope. No decrease in antimicrobial consumption was found. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Use of a behavioral approach preserving prescriber autonomy resulted in an increase in antimicrobial appropriateness sustained for at least 12 months. The approach is inexpensive and could be easily transferable to various health care environments.

AB - IMPORTANCE Inappropriate antimicrobial prescribing leads to antimicrobial resistance and suboptimal clinical outcomes. Changing antimicrobial prescribing is a complex behavioral process that is not often taken into account in antimicrobial stewardship programs. OBJECTIVE To examine whether an antimicrobial stewardship approach grounded in behavioral theory and focusing on preserving prescriber autonomy and participation is effective in improving appropriateness of antimicrobial prescribing in hospitals. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS The Dutch Unique Method for Antimicrobial Stewardship (DUMAS) study was a prospective, stepped-wedge, participatory intervention study performed from October 1, 2011, through December 31, 2015. Outcomes were measured during a baseline period of 16 months and an intervention period of 12 months. The study was performed at 7 clinical departments (2 medical, 3 surgical, and 2 pediatric) in a tertiary care medical center and a general teaching hospital in the Netherlands. Physicians prescribing systemic antimicrobial drugs for any indication for patients admitted to the participating departments during the study period were included in the study. INTERVENTIONS We offered prescribers a free choice of how to improve their antimicrobial prescribing. Prescribers were stimulated to choose interventions with higher potential for success based on a root cause analysis of inappropriate prescribing. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Appropriateness of antimicrobial prescriptionswas determined using a validated approach based on guideline adherence and motivated guideline deviation and measured with repeated point prevalence surveys (6 per year). Appropriateness judgment was masked for the study period. Antimicrobial consumption was extracted from pharmacy records and measured as days of therapy per admission.We used linear and logistic mixed-model regression analysis to model outcomes over time. RESULTS A total of 1121 patient cases with 700 antimicrobial prescriptions were assessed during the baseline period and 882 patient cases with 531 antimicrobial prescriptions during the intervention period. The mean antimicrobial appropriateness increased from 64.1%at intervention start to 77.4%at 12-month follow-up (+13.3%; relative risk, 1.17; 95%CI, 1.04-1.27), without a change in slope. No decrease in antimicrobial consumption was found. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Use of a behavioral approach preserving prescriber autonomy resulted in an increase in antimicrobial appropriateness sustained for at least 12 months. The approach is inexpensive and could be easily transferable to various health care environments.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85027254275&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1001/jamainternmed.2017.0946

DO - 10.1001/jamainternmed.2017.0946

M3 - Article

VL - 177

SP - 1130

EP - 1138

JO - JAMA Internal Medicine

JF - JAMA Internal Medicine

SN - 2168-6106

IS - 8

ER -