4.5 Article

Surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis prescribing practices and impact on infection risk: Results from a multicenter surveillance study in Italy (2012-2017)

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INFECTION CONTROL
Volume 47, Issue 12, Pages 1426-1430

Publisher

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajic.2019.07.013

Keywords

Surgical site infections; Surgical prophylaxis; Antimicrobial resistance

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Italy is one of the largest consumers of broad-spectrum agents (BSAs) in Europe. This study evaluated surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis (SAP) compliance with the Italian national guidelines and its impact on surgical site infection (SSI) risk. Methods: A prospective study was conducted in 42 hospitals participating in the national surveillance system for SSIs. SAP compliance was evaluated considering antibiotic choice, duration of administration, and timing of first dose. Trends in the consumption of 5 BSAs were also evaluated. Results: Between 2012 and 2017, 24,861 surgical procedures were monitored. The risk ratios (RRs) for appropriate SAP increased by 22% each year, and significant increasing trends over time were found for overall compliance, timing, and duration. Adequate antibiotic choice and duration of administration were associated with a significantly reduced SSI risk (RR = 0.57; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.5-0.65 vs RR = 0.51; 95% CI, 0.45-0.57, respectively), and overall compliance was associated with a RR of 0.65 (95% CI, 0.59-0.72). Conclusions: These findings suggest that appropriate narrow-spectrum agents could be more effective than BSAs in preventing SSIs. Interventions to improve SAP compliance with guidelines could significantly contribute to reducing antimicrobial resistance by reducing SSIs and promoting more prudent use of antimicrobials. (C) 2019 Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available