English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background There is a need to develop successful antibiotic stewardship interventions that do not require ID physicians. Our hospital implemented a pharmacist-driven intervention to prompt critical assessment of antibiotic regimens during interdisciplinary team rounds. We evaluated the acceptance of this intervention and the effects on concordance with institutional prescribing guidance. Methods This quality improvement initiative took place between November 2016 and June 2017 on a medical ward in an urban, level 1 trauma, public teaching hospital. During interdisciplinary team rounds, if the medicine team’s antimicrobial choice was not concordant with institutional prescribing guidance, the clinical pharmacist made a recommendation. We assessed prescribing for urinary tract infection, skin and soft-tissue infection, and pneumonia pre- and post-intervention. Prescribing was classified as overall guideline-concordant if the antibiotic choices and duration of therapy were consistent with institutional guidance. Results Thirty cases from each period were evaluated. Recommendations to the medical team were made on 63% (92/146) of days and on 31% (205/664) of patients on antibiotics. The most common recommendation was regarding days of therapy (Figure 1). The recommendations were accepted in 76% (156/205) of cases. (Figure 2). There were improvements in both the inpatient (70% to 83%, P = 0.22) and discharge (64% to 86%, P = 0.35) antibiotic choices and overall guideline concordance (53% to 63%, P = 0.43); however, these were not statistically significant. Concordance with duration of therapy was similar between the periods (76% vs. 77%, P = 0.94) (Figure 3). Conclusion During interdisciplinary rounds, prompting by pharmacists to critically assess antibiotic regimens is a feasible antibiotic stewardship intervention that does not require ID expertise, is generally accepted by physicians, and may increase guideline-concordant antibiotic selection. Figure 1: Figure 2: Figure 3: Baseline (N = 30) Intervention (N = 30) P-value Concordance with guidelines Inpatient antibiotic choice 21/30 (70%) 25/30 (83%) 0.22 Discharge antibiotic choice 7/11 (64%) 12/14 (86%) 0.35 Duration of therapy 22/29 (76%) 23/30 (77%) 0.94 Overall concordance 16/30 (53%) 19/30 (63%) 0.43 Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures.

198. Pharmacist-Led Antimicrobial Prompting During Interdisciplinary Team Rounds as a Novel Antimicrobial Stewardship Intervention