Clinical outcomes in patients admitted to a hospitalist service exposed to an antimicrobial stewardship program – a retrospective matched cohort study

E. Rennert-MayEmail author View ORCID ID profile,
J. Conly,
G. Chen and
B. Dalton

Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control20198:85

https://doi.org/10.1186/s13756-019-0542-2

Received: 19 November 2018
Accepted: 17 May 2019
Published: 24 May 2019

Abstract

Background

Given global issues with antimicrobial resistance and a need to optimize antimicrobial usage, antimicrobial stewardship (AS) programs are becoming a necessary component of hospitals and are increasingly mandated worldwide. It is important to evaluate these programs with respect to relevant clinical outcomes.

Methods

An AS program with a prospective audit and feedback service (PAF) of antimicrobial usage was initiated May 11, 2015 at our tertiary care center, for patients admitted under the hospitalist service. We conducted a retrospective matched cohort study. Patients assessed during the first year of this PAF were considered to be the exposed cohort and were compared to unexposed controls matched on gender, age and infectious diagnosis selected from patients who had been admitted under the hospitalist service prior to initiation of the PAF. Descriptive analysis was completed and a multivariate conditional logistic regression was performed to analyze differences between the exposed and control groups in terms of a composite endpoint of 30 day mortality, 30 day post hospital discharge mortality and hospital re-admission.

Results

A total of 348 patients were assessed and received PAF suggestions during the first year were compared to 827 matched control patients who did not receive PAF suggestions. Of 707 PAF suggestions made, the most common was to stop an antimicrobial (23%). A significantly lower (20.7% vs 28.8%, p = 0.008) composite endpoint was found in the group exposed to the PAF (OR 0.71 95%CI 0.52–0.97). This difference persisted when only patients with PAF suggestions that were completely or partially accepted were considered (18.6% vs 28.5%, p = 0.001) but was no longer significant when patients who had their ASP suggestions declined were analyzed (30.2% vs 26.7%, p = 0.610).

Conclusions

In this retrospective cohort study, patient admissions in which PAF recommendations were accepted had better clinical outcomes than matched historical controls managed in the absence of this AS service.