bioMérieux.

Intra-abdominal infections (IAI) are an important cause of morbidity and are frequently associated with poor prognosis, particularly in high-risk patients.The cornerstones in the management of complicated IAIs are timely effective source control with appropriate antimicrobial therapy. Empiric antimicrobial therapy is important in the management of intra-abdominal infections and must be broad enough to cover all likely organisms because inappropriate initial antimicrobial therapy is associated with poor patient outcomes and the development of bacterial resistance.The overuse of antimicrobials is widely accepted as a major driver of some emerging infections (such as C. difficile), the selection of resistant pathogens in individual patients, and for the continued development of antimicrobial resistance globally. The growing emergence of multi-drug resistant organisms and the limited development of new agents available to counteract them have caused an impending crisis with alarming implications, especially with regards to Gram-negative bacteria.An international task force from 79 different countries has joined this project by sharing a document on the rational use of antimicrobials for patients with IAIs. The project has been termed AGORA (Antimicrobials: A Global Alliance for Optimizing their Rational Use in Intra-Abdominal Infections). The authors hope that AGORA, involving many of the world's leading experts, can actively raise awareness in health workers and can improve prescribing behavior in treating IAIs.

In February, 2016, WHO released a report for the development of national action plans to address the threat of antibiotic resistance, the catastrophic consequences of inaction, and the need for antibiotic stewardship. Antibiotic stewardship combined with infection prevention comprises a collaborative, multidisciplinary approach to optimise use of antibiotics. Efforts to mitigate overuse will be unsustainable without learning and coordinating activities globally. In this Personal View, we provide examples of international collaborations to address optimal prescribing, focusing on five countries that have developed different approaches to antibiotic stewardship-the USA, South Africa, Colombia, Australia, and the UK. Although each country's approach differed, when nurtured, individual efforts can positively affect local and national antimicrobial stewardship programmes. Government advocacy, national guidelines, collaborative research, online training programmes, mentoring programmes, and social media in stewardship all played a role. Personal relationships and willingness to learn from each other's successes and failures continues to foster collaboration. We recommend that antibiotic stewardship models need to evolve from infection specialist-based teams to develop and use cadres of health-care professionals, including pharmacists, nurses, and community health workers, to meet the needs of the global population. We also recommend that all health-care providers who prescribe antibiotics take ownership and understand the societal burden of suboptimal antibiotic use, providing examples of how countries can learn, act globally, and share best antibiotic stewardship practices.

BackgroundThe prevalence and impact of antimicrobial “allergy” labels and Adverse Drug Reactions (ADRs) on antibiotic usage and antimicrobial stewardship initiatives is ill defined. We sought to examine the rate of antimicrobial “allergy labels” at our tertiary referral centre and impacts on antimicrobial usage and appropriateness.MethodsTwo inpatient antimicrobial prevalence surveys were conducted over a 1-week period in November 2013 and 2014 as part of the prospective National Antimicrobial Prescribing Survey (NAPS). Post survey, patients recorded in the NAPS database were assigned to two groups based upon recorded antimicrobial “allergy label” and ADR: (i) Antimicrobial Allergy/ADR (AA) or (ii) No Antimicrobial Allergy/ADR (NAA). Antimicrobial usage and antimicrobial appropriateness were compared between AA and NAA groups.ResultsFrom 509 identified patients the prevalence of an antimicrobial allergy or ADR was 25 %. The prevalence of “allergy labels”/ADR was 10 % (51/509) for penicillin V/G, 5 % (24/509) cephalosporins, 4 % (22/509) trimethroprim-sulfamethoxazole and 3 % (17/509) aminopenicillins. One thousand and seventy antimicrobials were prescribed during the study periods, the median antimicrobial duration was longer in the AA versus NAA group (6 days vs. 4 days; p = 0.018), and proportion of inappropriate antimicrobial prescribing higher in the AA group compared with NAA (29 %; 35/120 vs. 23 %; 86/367, p = 0.22). Oral antimicrobial administration was higher in the NAA than AA group (60 %; 177/297 vs. 46 %; 356/793, p = 0.0001). The proportion of patients that received a β-lactam was lower in the AA versus NAA group (60 % vs. 79 %, p = 0.0001).ConclusionsIn an Australian tertiary referral centre an antimicrobial “allergy” or ADR label was found to significantly impacted on rate of oral antimicrobial administration, beta-lactam usage, antimicrobial duration and antimicrobial appropriateness.

The introduction of an antimicrobial stewardship program, including postprescription review, resulted in an immediate reduction in broad-spectrum antimicrobial use in a tertiary referral centre. However, the effect of this intervention reduced over time.