Tailoring Antimicrobial Stewardship (AMS) Interventions to the Cultural Context: An Investigation of AMS Programs Operating in Northern Italian Acute-Care Hospitals

Antibiotic misuse and overuse are important contributors to the development of antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) programs are coordinated sets of actions aiming to promote appropriate antibiotic use, improving patient outcomes whilst reducing AMR. Two main organizational models for AMS programs have been described: restrictive strategies (RS) vs. enabling strategies (ES). Evaluating and understanding social and cultural influences on antibiotic decision-making are critical for the development of successful and sustainable context-specific AMS programs. Characteristics and surrogate outcomes of AMS programs operating in acute-care hospitals of Piedmont in north-western Italy were investigated. The aim of this study was assessing whether RS vs. ES operating in our context were associated with different outcomes in terms of total antimicrobial usage and percentage of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and carbapenem-resistant enterobacteria (CRE) over invasive isolates. In total, 24 AMS programs were assessed. ES were more frequently chosen compared to RS, with the latter being implemented only in broader AMS programs involving enabling components (combined strategy, CS). This study found no difference in evaluated outcomes among hospitals implementing ES vs. CS, suggesting both approaches could be equally valid in our context.

Automated summary

Antibiotic misuse and overuse contribute to antimicrobial resistance, and antimicrobial stewardship programs aim to promote appropriate antibiotic use and reduce resistance. Restrictive strategies (RS) and enabling strategies (ES) are two main organizational models for AMS programs, with a study in Piedmont hospitals showing no significant difference in outcomes between the two approaches.