Abstract
Objective To assess the perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis (PAP) prescriptions in a general hospital, Diyarbakir, Turkey. Method An evaluative audit in a prospective cohort included into the study between February and June 2003. All clean and clean-contaminated elective surgical procedures in six surgical wards were recorded. Using the ATC-DDD system, density of antimicrobial use was calculated per procedure. Results Totally 331 of 391 (84.7%) study procedures received PAP. PAP was indicated in 45% of PAP non-received group and not indicated in 15.1% of received group. Only 18.4% of PAP lasted less than 24 h. The most common prescribed agents were the first generation cephalosporins (85.8%) and aminoglycosides (24.2%). Timing of the initial dose was inappropriate in 135 procedures (40.8%). Only in 44 procedures (13.3%) all steps of PAP were found justified and correct in PAP received group. The mean dosage number of PAP (±SD) for per operation was 8.7 ± 12.5. The density of antimicrobial use was calculated as 330.2 DDD/100-operation. The density of antimicrobial use per operation was 3.3 DDD. Conclusion The density of antimicrobial use in PAP is very high. To improve the appropriateness of PAP, measure of antibiotic use is urgently required.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
References
Woods RK, Dellinger EP. Current guidelines for antibiotic prophylaxis of surgical wounds. Am Fam Physician. 1998;57:2731–40.
Gyssens IC. Preventing postoperative infections: current treatment recommendations. Drugs. 1999;57:175–85. doi:10.2165/00003495-199957020-00004.
Pestotnik SL, Classen DC, Evans RS, Burke JP. Implementing antibiotic practice guidelines through computer-assisted decision support: clinical and financial outcomes. Ann Intern Med. 1996;124:884–90.
Hosoglu S, Sunbul M, Erol S, Altindis M, Caylan R, Demirdag K, et al. Surgical antibiotic prophylaxis in Turkey: a survey study. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2003;24:758–61. doi:10.1086/502127.
WHO collaborating centre for drug statistics methodology. ATC index with DDDs. Oslo: WHO; 2003.
Martin C, Pourriat JL. Quality of perioperative antibiotic administration by French anaesthetists. J Hosp Infect. 1998;40:47–53. doi:10.1016/S0195-6701(98)90024-X.
van Kasteren ME, Mannien J, Kullberg BJ, de Boer AS, Nagelkerke NJ, Ridderhof M, et al. Quality improvement of surgical prophylaxis in Dutch hospitals: evaluation of a multi-site intervention by time series analysis. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2005;56:1094–102. doi:10.1093/jac/dki374.
Gyssens IC, Geerligs IE, Dony JM, van Kampen A, van den Broek PJ, Hekster YA, et al. Optimising antimicrobial drug use in surgery: an intervention study in a Dutch University Hospital. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1996;38:1001–12. doi:10.1093/jac/38.6.1001.
Su HY, Ding DC, Chen DC, Lu MF, Liu JY, Chang FY. Prospective randomized comparison of single-dose versus 1-day cefazolin for prophylaxis in gynecologic surgery. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2005;84:384–9. doi:10.1111/j.0001-6349.2005.00583.x.
Acknowledgements
Funding
No financial support was provided for this study
Conflicts of interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest or financial interests in any product or service mentioned in this article.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hosoglu, S., Aslan, S., Akalin, S. et al. Audit of quality of perioperative antimicrobial prophylaxis. Pharm World Sci 31, 14–17 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-008-9259-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-008-9259-7