search.noResults

search.searching

note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
infection control & hospital epidemiology october 2017, vol. 38, no. 10 original article


Implementation of an Antimicrobial Stewardship Program in a Neonatal Intensive Care Unit


Nneka I. Nzegwu, DO;1Michelle R. Rychalsky, PharmD;2 Loren A. Nallu,MD;3 Xuemei Song,MA, MS;4 Yanhong Deng, MPH, MS;4 AmberM. Natusch, RNC-NIC;5 Robert S. Baltimore, MD;3,6 George R. Paci, RN, CIC;6 Matthew J. Bizzarro,MD3


objective. To evaluate antimicrobial utilization and prescription practices in a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) after implementation of an antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP).


design. Quasi-experimental, interrupted time-series study. setting. A 54-bed, level IV NICU in a regional academic and tertiary referral center. patients and participants. All neonates prescribed antimicrobials from January 1, 2011, to June 30, 2016, were eligible for inclusion. intervention. Implementation of a NICU-specific ASP beginning July 2012.


methods. Weconvened a multidisciplinary team and developed guidelines for common infections, with a focus on prescriber audit and feedback. We conducted an interrupted time-series analysis to evaluate the effects of our ASP. Our primary outcome measure was days of antibiotic therapy (DOT) per 1,000 patient days for all and for select antimicrobials. Secondary outcomes included provider-specific antimicrobial prescription events for suspected late-onset sepsis (blood or cerebrospinal fluid infection at >72 hours of life) and guideline compliance.


results. Antibiotic utilization decreased by 14.7 DOT per 1,000 patient days during the stewardship period, although this decrease was not statistically significant (P=.669). Use of ampicillin, the most commonly antimicrobial prescribed in our NICU, decreased significantly, declining by 22.5 DOT per 1,000 patient days (P=.037). Late-onset sepsis evaluation and prescription events per 100 NICU days of clinical service decreased significantly (P<.0001), with an average reduction of 2.65 evaluations per year per provider. Clinical guidelines were adhered to 98.75% of the time.


conclusions. Implementation of a NICU-specific antimicrobial stewardship program is feasible and can improve antibiotic prescribing practices.


Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2017;38:1137–1143


Antibiotics are among the most commonly prescribed medications in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU).1,2 Unlike in children and adults, neonates often exhibit nonspecific clinical and laboratory signs, making it difficult to distinguish infections from other disease processes.3,4 While timely interventions for a true infection are critical, repeated and unnecessary exposures to broad-spectrum antibiotics can result in the development of antimicrobial resistance among certain organisms, as well as an increased risk of candidemia, necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC), hospital-acquired infections, and death in preterm infants.5–13 Organizations have published guidelines aimed at improving


antibiotic prescription practices of healthcare providers and, based on these guidelines, some children’s hospitals have successfully implemented antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs).14–20 Information on the design and implementation of


NICU-specific ASPs, however, remains extremely limited. In 2012, Patel and Saiman21 modified aspects of the Get Smart for Healthcare campaign17 and created a blueprint for such a pro- gram. Utilizing these guidelines, we designed and implemented anASPintheYale-New HavenChildren’s Hospital (YNHCH) NICU. The primary objective of this investigation was to assess theimpactof thatASPon antimicrobial prescription practices and utilization in our NICU.


methods Study Setting and Population


The YNHCH NICU is a 54-bed, level 4 NICU within a non– free-standing children’s hospital in New Haven, Connecticut, with all pediatric medical and surgical subspecialties available on site. Approximately 9%–10% of our NICU population


Affiliations: 1. Department of Pediatric Newborn Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts; 2. Pharmacy Services, Yale-New


Haven Hospital, New Haven, Connecticut; 3. Department of Pediatrics, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut; 4. Center for Analytical Sciences, Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, Connecticut; 5. Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, Yale-New Haven Children’s Hospital, New Haven, Connecticut; 6. Hospital Epidemiology and Infection Control, Yale-New Haven Hospital, New Haven, Connecticut.


© 2017 by The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America. All rights reserved. 0899-823X/2017/3810-0001. DOI: 10.1017/ice.2017.151 Received May 3, 2017; accepted June 12, 2017; electronically published July 26, 2017

Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136  |  Page 137  |  Page 138  |  Page 139  |  Page 140  |  Page 141  |  Page 142  |  Page 143  |  Page 144