Antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASP) are an essential strategy to combat antimicrobial resistance. This study aimed to measure the impact of an ASP multidisciplinary team (MDT) escalating intervention on improvement of clinical, microbiological, and other measured outcomes in hospitalised adult patients from medical, intensive care, and burns units. The escalating intervention reviewed the patients’ cases in the intervention group through the clinical pharmacists in the wards and escalated complex cases to ID clinical pharmacist and ID physicians when needed, while only special cases required direct infectious disease (ID) physicians review. Both non-intervention and intervention groups were each followed up for six months. The study involved a total of 3000 patients, with 1340 (45%) representing the intervention group who received a total of 5669 interventions. In the intervention group, a significant reduction in length of hospital stay (p < 0.01), readmission (p < 0.01), and mortality rates (p < 0.01) was observed. Antibiotic use of the WHO AWaRe Reserve group decreased in the intervention group (relative rate change = 0.88). Intravenous to oral antibiotic ratio in the medical ward decreased from 4.8 to 4.1. The presented ASP MDT intervention, utilizing an escalating approach, successfully improved several clinical and other measured outcomes, demonstrating the significant contribution of clinical pharmacists atimproving antibiotic use and informing antimicrobial stewardship.

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a well-known global threat due to the subsequent increase in antimicrobial usage. Several antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) strategies have been implemented to curb irrational prescribing and reduce the AMR burden. However, since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, it has enormously impacted the healthcare system and jeopardized public health, causing millions of deaths globally. Our semi-structured qualitative study aimed to explore the impact of COVID-19 on AMS activities in the UK hospitals. Seventeen interviews were conducted with health care professionals who were part of AMS teams (consultant medical microbiologists, infectious disease consultants, antimicrobial pharmacists). Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. An inductive thematic framework was adopted to analyse and create the themes. After agreement of the hierarchical framework definition, all transcripts were coded accordingly. Four main themes and 15 sub-themes were identified. These main themes were: (1) AMS activities or strategies before and during the pandemic; (2) challenges to implementing AMS activities before and during the pandemic; (3) information from public authorities on AMS during the pandemic; and (4) new AMS activities/strategies adopted during the pandemic. Staff vacancies, redeploying of AMS staff to other duties and meeting the burden related to the COVID-19 and lack of resources were the most frequently identified contributing factors to withheld AMS activities during the pandemic. However, modifications to the hybrid working environment, i.e., remote or flexible working, allowed for resumption of AMS activities including virtual ward rounds, virtual meetings and other activities. Further research needs to assess the impact of the hybrid delivery system on AMS activities.

Antimicrobial stewardship interventions are targeted efforts by healthcare organizations to optimize antimicrobial use in clinical practice. The study aimed to explore effective interventions in improving antimicrobial use in hospitals. Literature was systemically searched for interventional studies through PubMed, CINAHL, and Scopus databases that were published in the period between January 2010 to April 2022. A random-effects model was used to pool and evaluate data from eligible studies that reported antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) interventions in outpatient and inpatient settings. Pooled estimates presented as proportions and standardized mean differences. Forty-eight articles were included in this review: 32 in inpatient and 16 in outpatient settings. Seventeen interventions have been identified, and eight outcomes have been targeted. AMS interventions improved clinical, microbiological, and cost outcomes in most studies. When comparing non-intervention with intervention groups using meta-analysis, there was an insignificant reduction in length of stay (MD: −0.99; 95% CI: −2.38, 0.39) and a significant reduction in antibiotics’ days of therapy (MD: −2.73; 95% CI: −3.92, −1.54). There were noticeable reductions in readmissions, mortality rates, and antibiotic prescriptions post antimicrobial stewardship multi-disciplinary team (AMS-MDT) interventions. Studies that involved a pharmacist as part of the AMS-MDT showed more significant improvement in measured outcomes than the studies that did not involve a pharmacist.