Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-29T11:15:47.541Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Appropriateness of Surgical Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Pediatric Patients in Italy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2017

Mariavalentina Giordano ,
Lorena Squillace  and
Maria Pavia
Mariavalentina Giordano
Affiliation:
Department of Health Sciences, University of Catanzaro “Magna Græcia,” CatanzaroItaly
Lorena Squillace
Affiliation:
Department of Health Sciences, University of Catanzaro “Magna Græcia,” CatanzaroItaly
Maria Pavia*
Affiliation:
Department of Health Sciences, University of Catanzaro “Magna Græcia,” CatanzaroItaly
*
Address correspondence to Maria Pavia, Chair of Hygiene, Department of Health Sciences Medical School, University of Catanzaro “Magna Græcia,” Via T. Campanella, 115, 88100 Catanzaro, Italy (pavia@unicz.it).
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

Appropriate use of surgical antibiotic prophylaxis (SAP) reduces intraoperative wound contamination in pediatric surgery, thus minimizing the risk of surgical site infection (SSIs). Conversely, inappropriate use of SAP exposes patients to the risk of antibiotic side effects and contributes to the emergence of antimicrobial resistance. Our aims were to describe SAP administration and to analyze factors associated with nonadherence in pediatric patients.

DESIGN

Descriptive study.

SETTING

Overall, 955 pediatric patients underwent 1,038 surgical procedures.

METHODS

We assessed adherence to SAP international guidelines for surgical procedures performed on children aged <18 years in 2015 in 4 randomly selected hospitals in Calabria (Italy). The clinical records of these patients were retrospectively reviewed.

RESULTS

Appropriate SAP administration or nonadministration pertained to 754 surgical procedures (72.6%). Surgical antibiotic prophylaxis was administered in 88.5% of 358 procedures with an SAP indication. Adherence to guidelines for appropriate drug choice were followed in 5.7% of cases, for route of administration in 76.7% of cases, for timing in 48.6% of cases, for duration in 14.5% of cases, and for dose in 91.5% of cases, and for all components in only 5 cases (1.6%). Among 680 procedures without SAP indication, 35.7% case patients received antibiotics. Inappropriate administration of antibiotics in procedures without SAP indication was associated with surgical specialty wards (P=.008), ordinary admission (P<.001), head and neck surgical procedures (P=.020), clean surgery (P=.017), and surgical duration (P=.010).

CONCLUSIONS

Discrepancies between SAP guidelines and actual practice behavior more frequently indicate excessive use of antibiotics than underuse. Increased awareness of SAP guidelines is required.

Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2017;38:823–831

Type
Original Articles
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 38 , Issue 7 , July 2017 , pp. 823 - 831
Copyright
© 2017 by The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America. All rights reserved 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1. Anderson, DJ. Surgical site infections. Infect Dis Clin North Am 2011;25:135–153.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2. Shah, GS, Christensen, RE, Wagner, DS, Pearce, BK, Sweeney, J, Tait, AR. Retrospective evaluation of antimicrobial prophylaxis in prevention of surgical site infection in the pediatric population. Paediatr Anaesth 2014;24:994–998.Google Scholar
3. Alexander, JW, Solomkin, JS, Edwards, MJ. Updated recommendations for control of surgical site infections. Ann Surg 2011;253:1082–1093.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4. Goldmann, DA, Weinstein, RA, Wenzel, RP. Strategies to prevent and control the emergence and spread of antimicrobial resistant microorganisms in hospitals: a challenge to hospital leadership (consensus statement). JAMA 1996;275:234–240.Google Scholar
5. Khoshbin, A, So, JP, Aleem, IS, Stephens, D, Matlow, AG, Wright, JG. Antibiotic prophylaxis to prevent surgical site infections in children: a prospective cohort study. Ann Surg 2015;262:397–402.Google Scholar
6. Napolitano, F, Izzo, MT, Di Giuseppe, G, Angelillo, IF. Evaluation of the appropriate perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis in Italy. PLoS One 2013;8:e79532.Google Scholar
7. Hohmann, C, Eickhoff, C, Radziwill, R, Schulz, M. Adherence to guidelines for antibiotic prophylaxis in surgery patients in German hospitals: a multicentre evaluation involving pharmacy interns. Infection 2012;40:131–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Bratzel, DW, Houck, PM, Richards, C, et al. Use of antimicrobial prophylaxis for major surgery: baseline results from the National Surgical Infection Prevention Project. Arch Surg 2005;140:174–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Friedman, ND, Styles, K, Gray, AM, Low, J, Athan, E. Compliance with surgical antibiotic prophylaxis at an Australian teaching hospital. Am J Infect Control 2013;41:71–74.Google Scholar
10. Knox, MC, Edye, M. Adherence to surgical antibiotic prophylaxis guidelines in New South Wales, Australia: identifying deficiencies and regression analysis of contributing factors. Surg Infect (Larchmt) 2016;17:203–209.Google Scholar
11. Miliani, K, L’Hériteau, F, Astagneau, P. Non-compliance with recommendations for the practice of antibiotic prophylaxis and risk of surgical site infection: results of a multilevel analysis from the INCISO surveillance network. J Antimicrob Chemother 2009;64:1307–1315.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12. Musmar, SM, Ba’ba, H, Owais, A. Adherence to guidelines of antibiotic prophylactic use in surgery: a prospective cohort study in North West Bank, Palestine. BMC Surg 2014;14:69.Google Scholar
13. Antibioticoprofilassi perioperatoria nell’adulto. Sistema nazionale per le linee guida (SNLG) website. http://www.snlg-iss.it/cms/files/LG_AntibioticoP_Unico_2008.pdf. Published 2008. Accessed September 15, 2015.Google Scholar
14. Antibiotic prophylaxis in surgery. SIGN, Edinburgh. Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) website. http://www.sign.ac.uk/pdf/sign104.pdf. Published 2008. Accessed September 15, 2015.Google Scholar
15. Rangel, SJ, Fung, M, Graham, DA, Ma, L, Nelson, CP, S Sandora, TJ. Recent trends in the use of antibiotic prophylaxis in pediatric surgery. J Pediatr Surg 2011;46:366–371.Google Scholar
16. Amadeo, B, Zarb, P, Muller, A, et al. European surveillance of antibiotic consumption (ESAC) point prevalence survey 2008: paediatric antimicrobial prescribing in 32 hospitals of 21 European countries. J Antimicrob Chemother 2010;65:2247–2252.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17. Ciofi Degli Atti, ML, Raponi, M, Tozzi, AE, Ciliento, G, Ceradini, J, Langiano, T. Point prevalence study of antibiotic use in a paediatric hospital in Italy. Euro Surveill 2008;13:541–544.Google Scholar
18. Mangram, AJ, Horan, TC, Pearson, ML, Silver, LC, Jarvis, WR. Guideline for prevention of surgical site infection, 1999. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Hospital Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee. Am J Infect Control 1999;27:97–132.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
19. StataCorp. 2015. Stata: Release 14. Statistical Software. College Station, TX: StataCorp LP.Google Scholar
20. Sandora, TJ, Fung, M, Melvin, P, Graham, DA, Rangel, SJ. National variability and appropriateness of surgical antibiotic prophylaxis in US children’s hospitals. JAMA Pediatr 2016;170:570–576.Google Scholar
21. Voit, SB, Todd, JK, Nelson, B, Nyquist, AC. Electronic surveillance system for monitoring surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis. Pediatrics 2005;116:1317–1322.Google Scholar
22. Ciofi degli Atti, M, Spila Alegiani, S, Raschetti, R, et al. Surgical antibiotic prophylaxis in children: adherence to indication, choice of agent, timing, and duration. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 2015;71:483–488.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
23. Klinger, G, Carmeli, I, Feigin, E, Freud, E, Steinberg, R, Levy, I. Compliance with surgical antibiotic prophylaxis guidelines in pediatric surgery. Eur J Pediatr Surg 2015;25:199–202.Google Scholar
24. Hedef, O, Bulent, ME, Aykut, S, Barcin, O, Mujgan, A. Peri-operative antibiotic prophylaxis: adherence to guidelines and effects of educational intervention. Int J Surg 2010;8:159–163.Google Scholar
25. Zvonar, R, Bush, P, Roth, V. Practice changes to improve delivery of surgical antibiotic prophylaxis. Healthc Q 2008;11:141–144.Google Scholar
26. Groselj Grenc, M, Derganc, M, Trsinar, B, Cizman, M. Antibiotic prophylaxis for surgical procedures on children. J Chemother 2006;18:38–42.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
27. Hing, WC, Yeoh, TT, Yeoh, SF, Lin, RT, Li, SC. An evaluation of antimicrobial prophylaxis in paediatric surgery and its financial implication. J Clin Pharm Ther 2005;30:371–381.Google Scholar
28. Report on the health status of country 2009–2010. Italian Ministry of Health website. http://www.rssp.salute.gov.it/rssp/paginaMenuDownloadRssp.jsp?lingua=english. Published 2011. Accessed March 15, 2017.Google Scholar
29. Summary of the latest data on antibiotic resistance in the European Union. European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) website. http://ecdc.europa.eu/en/eaad/Documents/antibiotic-resistance-in-EU-summary.pdf. Published 2016. Accessed March 15, 2017.Google Scholar
30. Bucknell, SJ, Mohajeri, M, Low, J, McDonald, M, Hill, DG. Single versus multiple-dose antibiotics prophylaxis for cardiac surgery. Aust NZ J Surg 2000;70:409–411.Google Scholar
31. Steinberg, JP, Braun, BI, Hellinger, WC, et al. Timing of antimicrobial prophylaxis and the risk of surgical site infections: results from the Trial to Reduce Antimicrobial Prophylaxis Errors. Ann Surg 2009;250:10–16.Google Scholar
32. Junker, T, Mujagic, E, Hoffmann, H, et al. Prevention and control of surgical site infections: review of the Basel Cohort Study. Swiss Med Wkly 2012;142:w13616.Google Scholar
33. Hawn, MT, Richman, JS, Vick, CC, et al. Timing of surgical antibiotic prophylaxis and the risk of surgical site infection. JAMA Surg 2013;148:649–657.Google Scholar
34. Young, B, Ng, TM, Teng, C, Ang, B, Tai, HY, Lye, DC. Nonconcordance with surgical site infection prevention guidelines and rates of surgical site infections for general surgical, neurological, and orthopedic procedures. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2011;55:4659–4663.Google Scholar
35. Prospero, E, Barbadoro, P, Marigliano, A, Martini, E, D’Errico, MM. Perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis: improved compliance and impact on infection rates. Epidemiol Infect 2011;139:1326–1331.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed