4.4 Article

Point prevalence data on antimicrobial usage in Italian acute-care hospitals: Evaluation and comparison of results from two national surveys (2011-2016)

期刊

INFECTION CONTROL AND HOSPITAL EPIDEMIOLOGY
卷 41, 期 5, 页码 579-584

出版社

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/ice.2020.18

关键词

-

资金

  1. project Sorveglianza nazionale delle infezioni correlate all'assistenza (Central action of the CCM, Centro Nazionale per la Prevenzione e il Controllo delle Malattie, 2015)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives and design: Data from the Italian national point-prevalence survey (PPS) of healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) were used to evaluate antimicrobial usage (AMU) in Italy and to identify targets for future interventions. Methods: The second Italian PPS was conducted in 2016 as part of the European PPS initiated by the ECDC. We compared these results with those of the first national survey, conducted in 2011. Results: An overall AMU prevalence of 44.5% (95% CI, 43.7-45.3) was estimated in 2016. No significant change in AMU prevalence was detected when comparing data with the first survey. In both surveys, the most prevalent indication for AMU was the treatment of infections. Considering all indications, penicillins plus beta-lactamase inhibitors (BLIs) were the most commonly prescribed antimicrobial group in 2016; they were used significantly more than in 2011, and piperacillin plus BLI was the most frequently used agent. Broad-spectrum agents accounted for >60% of all antimicrobials for systemic use. No significant increase in the use of carbapenems occurred in 2016. Stable or decreasing carbapenem-resistance levels were identified in this study, although these levels remain alarmingly high for both Klebsiella pneumoniae (50%) and Acinetobacter baumannii (>75%). Conclusions: These results can be used to identify priorities and targets for interventions that promote more prudent use of antimicrobials, improve healthcare quality and patient safety, and combat the emergence and spread of antimicrobial-resistant pathogens.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据