Assessment of antimicrobial prescribing practice, knowledge, and culture in three teaching hospitals

Résumé fourni par la source

BACKGROUND: Antimicrobial resistance (AR) is one of the most critical threats to global health. One of its root causes, misuse of antibiotics, can stem from prescribers' preconceived ideas, differing attitudes, and lack of knowledge. Canadian data on this subject are scarce. This study aimed to understand the culture and knowledge of antimicrobial prescribing to optimize strategies targeting prescribers in the local antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP). METHODS: An anonymous online survey was developed and distributed to antimicrobials prescribers at three acute-care teaching hospitals. The questionnaire surveyed perception of AR and ASPs. RESULTS: A total of 440 respondents completed the entire survey. All agreed that AR is a significant challenge in Canada. The vast majority (86%) of respondents believed that AR is a significant problem at their working hospital. However, only 36% of respondents believed that antibiotics are misused locally. Most (92%) agreed that ASPs can decrease AR. Several knowledge gaps were identified through clinical questions. For example, respondents failed to identify treatment indications for asymptomatic bacteriuria 15% of the time and 59% chose an unnecessarily broad antibiotic when presented a microbiology report with susceptibility results associated with a common clinical syndrome. Prescribers' self-reported confidence did not correlate with their knowledge score. CONCLUSIONS: Respondents recognized AR as a critical issue but awareness and knowledge on antibiotic misuse were lacking. As shown in previous studies, respondents see the threat of AR in a more theoretical way. This study provided a better understanding of antimicrobial prescribing practices and ways to optimize them within three teaching hospitals in Montréal. Barriers to optimal antimicrobial prescribing were identified and strategies for improving the effectiveness of the ASP will be developed accordingly.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.