Implementation of Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs in Adult Intensive Care Units and General Wards at Argentinean Hospitals: The PROA Project

dc.contributor.authorRodolfo Quirós
dc.contributor.authorMarta Cabral
dc.contributor.authorR. Bertuzzi
dc.contributor.authorJuan Pablo Caeiro
dc.contributor.authorVioleta J. Rodriguez
dc.contributor.authorM. Pfoh
dc.contributor.authorAnna Vila‐Martí
dc.contributor.authorDiego Marcelo Maurizi
dc.contributor.authorLiliana Calanni
dc.contributor.authorV. Vitolo
dc.coverage.spatialBolivia
dc.date.accessioned2026-03-22T15:51:33Z
dc.date.available2026-03-22T15:51:33Z
dc.date.issued2018
dc.descriptionCitaciones: 3
dc.description.abstractBackground: Background: Implementation of antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) programs is considered as a useful strategy in order to improve clinical outcomes in a cost-effective way, reducing in addition antimicrobial resistance. The aim of this study was to determine the impact of AMS programs at institutional level in Argentinean hospitals Methods & Materials: Material and methods: Since Jul-2016 a multicenter study (PROA Project) was launched in Argentina. One-hundred eleven centers enter into the project. Until October-2017, twenty-five hospitals completed the twelve months of the study. All centers performed a self-assessment survey of their AMS programs using a standardized tool based on CDC recommendations (0–100 scale) at the beginning and at the end of the study. Additionally, the appropriateness of antimicrobial prescription was measured as a percentage of total prescriptions through four one-day prevalence surveys using specific criteria. The consumption of a group of antimicrobials was calculated monthly using Defined Daily Doses (DDD) adjusted by 100 patient-days Results: Results: Although the initial score was low in these centers, all improved along the study (27.8 ± 16.3 vs 38.9 ± 18.8; diff. 11.2 95%CI 6.1 a 16.3; p = 0.0001). Additionally, we also found a significant improvement in the indicators analyzed when the first two prevalence surveys were compared with the last two (registration in the clinical record 81.0% vs88.3%; diff. 7.3%; 95%CI 4.9% to 9.6%; p < 0.000; compliance with clinical guidelines 47.8% vs 59.1%; diff. 11.3%; 95%CI 8.0% to 14.6%; p < 0.000; prospective audit with feedback 46.4% vs 59.1%; diff. 12.7%; 95%CI 9.4% to 16.0%, p < 0.000; antimicrobial consumption 126.7 DDDs vs 100.3 DDDs; diff.–26.4 95%CI–25.5 to–27.4; p < 0.000). Only surgical prophylaxis ≤ 24 hs did not show a significant improvement (59.0% vs 64.0%; diff. 5.0%; 95%CI -3.0% to 13.0%, p = NS). Those hospitals with initial score above the 50th percentile, showed higher improvements Conclusion: Conclusions: The implementation of AMS programs, at institutional level in Argentinean hospitals, allowed to improve the appropriateness indicators associated with antimicrobial prescriptions
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.ijid.2018.04.3737
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2018.04.3737
dc.identifier.urihttps://andeanlibrary.org/handle/123456789/54829
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherElsevier BV
dc.relation.ispartofInternational Journal of Infectious Diseases
dc.sourceUniversidad Privada de Santa Cruz de la Sierra
dc.subjectMedicine
dc.subjectAntimicrobial stewardship
dc.subjectMedical prescription
dc.subjectMulticenter study
dc.subjectAntimicrobial
dc.subjectEmergency medicine
dc.subjectDefined daily dose
dc.subjectFamily medicine
dc.titleImplementation of Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs in Adult Intensive Care Units and General Wards at Argentinean Hospitals: The PROA Project
dc.typearticle

Files