An evaluation of provider-chosen antibiotic indications as a targeted antimicrobial stewardship intervention

Veronica Timmons, Jennifer Townsend, Robin McKenzie, Catherine Burdalski, Victoria Adams-Sommer

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background: Provider-entered indications for antibiotics have been recommended as a tracking tool for antibiotic stewardship programs. The accuracy and utility of these indications are unknown. Methods: Drug-specific lists of evidence-based indications were integrated into an electronic health system as an ordering hard-stop. We reviewed antibiotic orders with provider-entered indications to determine whether the chosen indication matched the documentation and whether antibiotic use was appropriate. Results: One hundred fifty-five antibiotic orders were reviewed. Clinical documentation supported the entered indication in 80% of vancomycin orders, 78% of cefepime orders, and 74% of fluoroquinolone orders. The clinical appropriateness for vancomycin, cefepime, and fluoroquinolones were 94%, 100%, and 68%, respectively. When providers chose indications from the list as opposed to choosing “other” and entering free text, antibiotic orders were significantly more likely to be appropriate (odds ratio, 5.8; P = .001) but also less likely to match clinical documentation (odds ratio, 0.25; P = .0043). Discussion: Provider-chosen indications are, overall, an accurate reflection of the true reason for antibiotic use at our institution. Providers frequently documented reasons for fluoroquinolone use that were not among the provided indications. Conclusion: Selecting an indication from an evidence-based list as opposed to free-text indications increases the odds that antibiotic agents will be used appropriately.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalAmerican Journal of Infection Control
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Jan 1 2018

Fingerprint

Anti-Bacterial Agents
Fluoroquinolones
Documentation
Vancomycin
Odds Ratio
Health
Pharmaceutical Preparations
cefepime

Keywords

  • Appropriate
  • Electronic medical record
  • Failure of indication
  • Mismatch

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Epidemiology
  • Health Policy
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
  • Infectious Diseases

Cite this

An evaluation of provider-chosen antibiotic indications as a targeted antimicrobial stewardship intervention. / Timmons, Veronica; Townsend, Jennifer; McKenzie, Robin; Burdalski, Catherine; Adams-Sommer, Victoria.

In: American Journal of Infection Control, 01.01.2018.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{a972fae7cac3466bb06e86af695c61fd,
title = "An evaluation of provider-chosen antibiotic indications as a targeted antimicrobial stewardship intervention",
abstract = "Background: Provider-entered indications for antibiotics have been recommended as a tracking tool for antibiotic stewardship programs. The accuracy and utility of these indications are unknown. Methods: Drug-specific lists of evidence-based indications were integrated into an electronic health system as an ordering hard-stop. We reviewed antibiotic orders with provider-entered indications to determine whether the chosen indication matched the documentation and whether antibiotic use was appropriate. Results: One hundred fifty-five antibiotic orders were reviewed. Clinical documentation supported the entered indication in 80{\%} of vancomycin orders, 78{\%} of cefepime orders, and 74{\%} of fluoroquinolone orders. The clinical appropriateness for vancomycin, cefepime, and fluoroquinolones were 94{\%}, 100{\%}, and 68{\%}, respectively. When providers chose indications from the list as opposed to choosing “other” and entering free text, antibiotic orders were significantly more likely to be appropriate (odds ratio, 5.8; P = .001) but also less likely to match clinical documentation (odds ratio, 0.25; P = .0043). Discussion: Provider-chosen indications are, overall, an accurate reflection of the true reason for antibiotic use at our institution. Providers frequently documented reasons for fluoroquinolone use that were not among the provided indications. Conclusion: Selecting an indication from an evidence-based list as opposed to free-text indications increases the odds that antibiotic agents will be used appropriately.",
keywords = "Appropriate, Electronic medical record, Failure of indication, Mismatch",
author = "Veronica Timmons and Jennifer Townsend and Robin McKenzie and Catherine Burdalski and Victoria Adams-Sommer",
year = "2018",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.ajic.2018.03.021",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "American Journal of Infection Control",
issn = "0196-6553",
publisher = "Mosby Inc.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - An evaluation of provider-chosen antibiotic indications as a targeted antimicrobial stewardship intervention

AU - Timmons, Veronica

AU - Townsend, Jennifer

AU - McKenzie, Robin

AU - Burdalski, Catherine

AU - Adams-Sommer, Victoria

PY - 2018/1/1

Y1 - 2018/1/1

N2 - Background: Provider-entered indications for antibiotics have been recommended as a tracking tool for antibiotic stewardship programs. The accuracy and utility of these indications are unknown. Methods: Drug-specific lists of evidence-based indications were integrated into an electronic health system as an ordering hard-stop. We reviewed antibiotic orders with provider-entered indications to determine whether the chosen indication matched the documentation and whether antibiotic use was appropriate. Results: One hundred fifty-five antibiotic orders were reviewed. Clinical documentation supported the entered indication in 80% of vancomycin orders, 78% of cefepime orders, and 74% of fluoroquinolone orders. The clinical appropriateness for vancomycin, cefepime, and fluoroquinolones were 94%, 100%, and 68%, respectively. When providers chose indications from the list as opposed to choosing “other” and entering free text, antibiotic orders were significantly more likely to be appropriate (odds ratio, 5.8; P = .001) but also less likely to match clinical documentation (odds ratio, 0.25; P = .0043). Discussion: Provider-chosen indications are, overall, an accurate reflection of the true reason for antibiotic use at our institution. Providers frequently documented reasons for fluoroquinolone use that were not among the provided indications. Conclusion: Selecting an indication from an evidence-based list as opposed to free-text indications increases the odds that antibiotic agents will be used appropriately.

AB - Background: Provider-entered indications for antibiotics have been recommended as a tracking tool for antibiotic stewardship programs. The accuracy and utility of these indications are unknown. Methods: Drug-specific lists of evidence-based indications were integrated into an electronic health system as an ordering hard-stop. We reviewed antibiotic orders with provider-entered indications to determine whether the chosen indication matched the documentation and whether antibiotic use was appropriate. Results: One hundred fifty-five antibiotic orders were reviewed. Clinical documentation supported the entered indication in 80% of vancomycin orders, 78% of cefepime orders, and 74% of fluoroquinolone orders. The clinical appropriateness for vancomycin, cefepime, and fluoroquinolones were 94%, 100%, and 68%, respectively. When providers chose indications from the list as opposed to choosing “other” and entering free text, antibiotic orders were significantly more likely to be appropriate (odds ratio, 5.8; P = .001) but also less likely to match clinical documentation (odds ratio, 0.25; P = .0043). Discussion: Provider-chosen indications are, overall, an accurate reflection of the true reason for antibiotic use at our institution. Providers frequently documented reasons for fluoroquinolone use that were not among the provided indications. Conclusion: Selecting an indication from an evidence-based list as opposed to free-text indications increases the odds that antibiotic agents will be used appropriately.

KW - Appropriate

KW - Electronic medical record

KW - Failure of indication

KW - Mismatch

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85047774221&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85047774221&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.ajic.2018.03.021

DO - 10.1016/j.ajic.2018.03.021

M3 - Article

C2 - 29861148

AN - SCOPUS:85047774221

JO - American Journal of Infection Control

JF - American Journal of Infection Control

SN - 0196-6553

ER -