Explore the vast range of titles available.

In February, 2016, WHO released a report for the development of national action plans to address the threat of antibiotic resistance, the catastrophic consequences of inaction, and the need for antibiotic stewardship. Antibiotic stewardship combined with infection prevention comprises a collaborative, multidisciplinary approach to optimise use of antibiotics. Efforts to mitigate overuse will be unsustainable without learning and coordinating activities globally. In this Personal View, we provide examples of international collaborations to address optimal prescribing, focusing on five countries that have developed different approaches to antibiotic stewardship—the USA, South Africa, Colombia, Australia, and the UK. Although each country's approach differed, when nurtured, individual efforts can positively affect local and national antimicrobial stewardship programmes. Government advocacy, national guidelines, collaborative research, online training programmes, mentoring programmes, and social media in stewardship all played a role. Personal relationships and willingness to learn from each other's successes and failures continues to foster collaboration. We recommend that antibiotic stewardship models need to evolve from infection specialist-based teams to develop and use cadres of health-care professionals, including pharmacists, nurses, and community health workers, to meet the needs of the global population. We also recommend that all health-care providers who prescribe antibiotics take ownership and understand the societal burden of suboptimal antibiotic use, providing examples of how countries can learn, act globally, and share best antibiotic stewardship practices.

Rapid microbiologic tests provide opportunities for antimicrobial stewardship programs to improve antimicrobial use and clinical and economic outcomes. Standard techniques for identification of organisms require at least 48–72 hours for final results, compared with rapid diagnostic tests that provide final organism identification within hours of growth. Importantly, rapid microbiologic tests are considered \"game changers\" and represent a significant advancement in the management of infectious diseases. This review focuses on currently available rapid diagnostic tests and, importantly, the impact of rapid testing in combination with antimicrobial stewardship on patient outcomes.

There are these three common themes: lack of work–life balance, no dedicated time to conduct ASP research, and not feeling appreciated for their efforts to improve patient care. Some of the responses include: “I am on-service providing direct patient care 12 months of the year, while also precepting students and residents in addition to doing didactic lectures and ASP research. After working full-time for 6 years in internal medicine, I had my first child and made a career change as the first ID clinical pharmacist at The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center.

The available data on antimicrobial stewardship programmes in Africa are scarce. The aims of this study were to assess the implementation of an antimicrobial stewardship programme in a setting with limited infectious disease resources. We implemented a pharmacist-driven, prospective audit and feedback strategy for antimicrobial stewardship on the basis of a range of improvement science and behavioural principles across a diverse group of urban and rural private hospitals in South Africa. The study had a pre-implementation phase, during which a survey of baseline stewardship activities was done. Thereafter, a stepwise implementation phase was initiated directed towards auditing process measures to reduce consumption of antibiotics (prolonged duration, multiple antibiotics, and redundant antibiotic coverage), followed by a post-implementation phase once the model was embedded in each hospital. The effect on consumption was assessed with the WHO index of defined daily doses per 100 patient–days, and the primary outcome (change in antibiotic consumption between phases) was assessed with a linear mixed-effects regression model. We implemented and assessed the antimicrobial stewardship programme between Oct 1, 2009, and Sept 30, 2014. 116 662 patients receiving antibiotics at 47 hospitals during 104 weeks of standardised measurement and feedback, were reviewed, with 7934 interventions by pharmacists recorded for the five targeted measures, suggesting that almost one in 15 prescriptions required intervention. 3116 (39%) of 7934 pharmacist interventions were of an excessive duration. The antimicrobial stewardship programme led to a reduction in mean antibiotic defined daily doses per 100 patient–days from 101·38 (95% CI 93·05–109·72) in the pre-implementation phase to 83·04 (74·87–91·22) in the post-implementation phase (p<0·0001). Health-care facilities with limited infectious diseases expertise can achieve substantial returns through pharmacist-led antimicrobial stewardship programmes and by focusing on basic interventions. None.

In an effort to decrease antimicrobial resistance and inappropriate antibiotic use, The Joint Commission (TJC) recently issued new antimicrobial stewardship standards, consisting of 8 elements of performance, applicable to hospitals effective January 1, 2017. These standards coincide with those recommended by the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) and the Society of Healthcare Epidemiology (SHEA) guidelines. Little guidance exists on the \"how\" from these guidance documents. We review the 8 standards and provide real-world experience from established antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) on how institutions can comply with these guidelines to reduce inappropriate antibiotic usage, decrease antimicrobial resistance, and optimize patient outcomes. TJC antimicrobial stewardship standards demonstrate actions being taken at the national level to make quality and patient safety a priority.

Rapid organism detection of Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia and communication to clinicians expedites antibiotic optimization. We evaluated clinical and economic outcomes of a rapid polymerase chain reaction methicillin-resistant S. aureus/S. aureus blood culture test (rPCR). This single-center study compared inpatients with S. aureus bacteremia admitted from 1 September 2008 through 31 December 2008 (pre-rPCR) and those admitted from 10 March 2009 through 30 June 2009 (post-rPCR). An infectious diseases pharmacist was contacted with results of the rPCR; effective antibiotics and an infectious diseases consult were recommended. Multivariable regression assessed clinical and economic outcomes of the 156 patients. Mean time to switch from empiric vancomycin to cefazolin or nafcillin in patients with methicillin-susceptible S. aureus bacteremia was 1.7 days shorter post-rPCR (P = .002). In the post-rPCR methicillin-susceptible and methicillin-resistant S. aureus groups, the mean length of stay was 6.2 days shorter (P = .07) and the mean hospital costs were $21,387 less (P = .02). rPCR allows rapid differentiation of S. aureus bacteremia, enabling timely, effective therapy and is associated with decreased length of stay and health care costs.

Background. Infectious diseases (ID) consultation and antimicrobial stewardship intervention have been shown to improve the management of Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia (SAB). As the workload of antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) continues to increase, ASPs must find a way to maximize the efficiency of the program while optimizing patient outcomes. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of incorporating health informatics into the management of SAB via a pharmacist-driven initiative. Methods. Retrospective, single-center quasi-experimental study of hospitalized patients with SAB. During the intervention period, pharmacists were alerted to patients with SAB via a patient scoring tool integrated into the electronic medical record. Pharmacists utilized the scoring tool and the institution's evidence-based practice guideline to make standardized recommendations to promote adherence to SAB quality-of-care measures and encourage ID consultation. The primary outcome was overall compliance along with adherence to individual quality-of-care components. Secondary clinical outcomes were also analyzed. Results. In sum, 84 patients were identified for study inclusion, 45 in the pre-intervention and 39 in the intervention group. As a whole, all 4 quality-of-care components for the management of SAB were significantly more frequently adhered to in the intervention group (68.9% vs 92.3%; P = .008). The incidence of ID consult improved significantly by almost 20% in the intervention group (75.6% vs 94.9%, P = .015). No statistically significant differences in duration of bacteremia, length-of-stay, infection-related length-of-stay, or readmission were observed between the groups. The incidence of all-cause mortality was 6-fold higher in the pre-intervention group compared to the intervention group (15.6% vs 2.6%, P = .063). Conclusion. An automated, pharmacist-driven intervention for the management of patients with SAB demonstrated a significant improvement in patients receiving an ID consult, targeted antimicrobial therapy, and adherence to all SAB quality-of-care measures. As antimicrobial stewardship becomes a mandatory aspect of healthcare in all hospitals in the United States, ASPs will be forced to find ways to provide more efficient, impactful, disease state-based patient care. Our study provides the framework for and data to support this intervention in one of the most clinically important infectious diseases.

Guidelines recommend daptomycin combination therapy as an option for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bacteremia after vancomycin failure. Recent data suggest that combining daptomycin with a β-lactam may have unique benefits; however, there are very limited clinical data regarding the use of ceftaroline with daptomycin. All 26 cases from the 10 medical centers in which ceftaroline plus daptomycin was used for treatment of documented refractory staphylococcal bacteremia from March 2011 to November 2012 were included. In vitro (synergy studies, binding assays, cathelicidin LL-37 killing assays), and in vivo (virulence assays using a murine subcutaneous infection model) studies examining the effects of ceftaroline with daptomycin were also performed. Daptomycin plus ceftaroline was used in 26 cases of staphylococcal bacteremia (20 MRSA, 2 vancomycin-intermediate S aureus, 2 methicillin-susceptible S aureus [MSSA], 2 methicillin-resistant S epidermidis). Bacteremia persisted for a median of 10 days (range, 3–23 days) on previous antimicrobial therapy. After daptomycin plus ceftaroline was started, the median time to bacteremia clearance was 2 days (range, 1–6 days). In vitro studies showed ceftaroline synergy against MRSA and enhanced MRSA killing by cathelicidin LL-37 and neutrophils. Ceftaroline also induced daptomycin binding in MSSA and MRSA to a comparable degree as nafcillin. MRSA grown in subinhibitory concentrations of ceftaroline showed attenuated virulence in a murine subcutaneous infection model. Ceftaroline plus daptomycin may be an option to hasten clearance of refractory staphylococcal bacteremia. Ceftaroline offers dual benefit via synergy with both daptomycin and sensitization to innate host defense peptide cathelicidin LL37, which could attenuate virulence of the pathogen.

Tackling antimicrobial resistance (AMR) through antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) interventions is a key objective within the World Health Organization (WHO)’s Global Action on AMR. We outline the reasons why global collaborations for AMS are needed. We provide examples of global collaborations, and we offer considerations when starting on a global health journey focused on AMS.