Published in

Royal College of General Practitioners, British Journal of General Practice, suppl 1(68), p. bjgp18X697025, 2018

DOI: 10.3399/bjgp18x697025

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Local implementation of AMS initiatives: a mixed-methods study

This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.
This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.

Full text: Unavailable

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Red circle
Postprint: archiving forbidden
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

BackgroundThe NHS English Quality Premium recommends that inappropriate antibiotic prescribing is reduced; there are a range of national antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) initiatives to support this.AimThe aim of this study is to assess AMS activities in primary care across England. The findings will be used to inform how the RCGP, PHE and NHS can help optimise stewardship activities.MethodQualitative interviews: with AMS leads within Clinical Commissioning Groups’ (CCGs) and Commissioning Support Units’ (CSUs) medicines management teams. Questionnaire: informed by the qualitative data, sent to all 209 CCGs in England in 2017.ResultsIn total, 89% (187/209) of CCGs returned a questionnaire; 82% of AMS leads reported spending only 0.1 whole-time equivalent on AMS activities, as it was only one role within a wider remit, so dedicating time is challenging. 99% (167/169) of CCGs had delivered AMS education in the last 2 years: 140 face-to-face; 121 via e-learning. 99% (184/186) actively promoted the TARGET Antibiotics Toolkit; 94% (175/187) actively promoted TARGET patient leaflets: 92% The Treating Your Infection (TYI) leaflet. 90% (166/185) used the PHE managing common infections guidance: 81% (149/185) modify or localise; 41/185 (22%) signpost directly to it. Eighty-six CCGs reported using CCG audit tools and 82 CCGs reported using TARGET’s audit tools. 85% (142/168) fed back antimicrobial prescribing data to the CCG/CSU board; 100% (169/169) to general practices and 33% (56/169) to out-of-hours providers.ConclusionAlthough CCGs reported promoting these AMS activities, there was little evaluation of uptake by primary care practitioners. Future work should focus on measuring AMS uptake; having staff dedicated solely to AMS could facilitate this.