Compliance with antibiotic prophylaxis guidelines in caesarean delivery: a retrospective, drug utilization study (indication-prescription type) at an Ecuadorian hospital.

Item request has been placed! ×
Item request cannot be made. ×
loading   Processing Request
  • Additional Information
    • Source:
      Publisher: BioMed Central Country of Publication: England NLM ID: 101585411 Publication Model: Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 2047-2994 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 20472994 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Antimicrob Resist Infect Control Subsets: MEDLINE
    • Publication Information:
      Original Publication: London : BioMed Central
    • Subject Terms:
    • Abstract:
      Background: Preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis is essential for preventing surgical site infection (SSI). The aim of this study was to evaluate compliance with international and local recommendations in caesarean deliveries carried out at the Obstetrics and Gynaecology Service of the Ambato General Hospital, as well as any related health and economic consequences.
      Methods: A retrospective indication-prescription drug utilization study was conducted using data from caesarean deliveries occurred in 2018. A clinical pharmacist assessed guidelines compliance based on the following criteria: administration of antibiotic prophylaxis, antibiotic selection, dose, time of administration and duration. The relationship between the frequency of SSI and other variables, including guideline compliance, was analysed. The cost associated with the antibiotic used was compared with the theoretical cost considering total compliance with recommendations. Descriptive statistics, Odds Ratio and Pearson Chi Square were used for data analysis by IBM SPSS Statistics version 25.
      Results: The study included 814 patients with an average age of 30.87 ± 5.50 years old. Among the caesarean sections, 68.67% were emergency interventions; 3.44% lasted longer than four hours and in 0.25% of the deliveries blood loss was greater than 1.5 L. Only 69.90% of patients received preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis; however, 100% received postoperative antibiotic treatment despite disagreement with guideline recommendations (duration: 6.75 ± 1.39 days). The use of antibiotic prophylaxis was more frequent in scheduled than in emergency caesarean sections (OR = 2.79, P = 0.000). Nevertheless, the timing of administration, antibiotic selection and dose were more closely adhered to guideline recommendations. The incidence of surgical site infection was 1.35%, but tended to increase in patients who had not received preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis (OR = 1.33, P = 0.649). Also, a significant relationship was found between SSI and patient age (χ 2  = 8.08, P = 0.036). The mean expenditure on antibiotics per patient was 5.7 times greater than that the cost derived from compliance with international recommendations.
      Conclusions: Surgical antibiotic prophylaxis compliance was far below guideline recommendations, especially with respect to implementation and duration. This not only poses a risk to patients but leads to unnecessary expenditure on medicines. Therefore, this justifies the need for educational interventions and the implementation of institutional protocols involving pharmacists.
    • References:
      J Infect Public Health. 2019 Nov - Dec;12(6):854-860. (PMID: 31196776)
      Antimicrob Resist Infect Control. 2018 May 2;7:63. (PMID: 29744044)
      Am J Infect Control. 2015 Nov;43(11):e67-71. (PMID: 26315059)
      BMC Surg. 2014 Sep 09;14:69. (PMID: 25204205)
      Int J Clin Pharm. 2018 Oct;40(5):1037-1043. (PMID: 30054786)
      Epidemiol Infect. 2019 Oct 10;147:e287. (PMID: 31597580)
      PLoS One. 2015 Jul 06;10(7):e0129434. (PMID: 26148063)
      Midwifery. 2017 Jan;44:35-40. (PMID: 27889681)
      Int J Obstet Anesth. 2020 May;42:76-86. (PMID: 31606251)
      Am J Infect Control. 2018 Jan;46(1):14-19. (PMID: 28800838)
      Lancet. 2018 Oct 13;392(10155):1341-1348. (PMID: 30322584)
      J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris). 2016 Nov;45(9):1133-1143. (PMID: 27212612)
      Surg Infect (Larchmt). 2019 Dec;20(8):650-657. (PMID: 31464573)
      Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Oct 28;(10):CD007482. (PMID: 25350672)
      Ann Fr Anesth Reanim. 2011 Feb;30(2):168-90. (PMID: 21324634)
      Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2019 Nov;40(11):1236-1241. (PMID: 31475658)
      JAMA Surg. 2017 Aug 01;152(8):784-791. (PMID: 28467526)
      BMC Infect Dis. 2019 Aug 28;19(1):752. (PMID: 31455246)
      PLoS One. 2018 Sep 13;13(9):e0203523. (PMID: 30212477)
      East Mediterr Health J. 2019 Apr 25;25(3):172-180. (PMID: 31054227)
      Obstet Gynecol. 2018 Sep;132(3):e103-e119. (PMID: 30134425)
      Antimicrob Resist Infect Control. 2019 Mar 6;8:49. (PMID: 30886702)
      Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2013 Feb 1;70(3):195-283. (PMID: 23327981)
      J Neurosurg. 2017 Mar;126(3):908-912. (PMID: 27257843)
      Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2019 Sep;240:256-260. (PMID: 31344664)
      BJOG. 2017 Mar;124(4):595-605. (PMID: 27885778)
      Cost Eff Resour Alloc. 2018 Dec 18;16:66. (PMID: 30574024)
      Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2015 Jan;94(1):43-9. (PMID: 25263498)
      Ann Surg. 2013 Jan;257(1):37-43. (PMID: 23001082)
      Sante Publique. 2018 Aug 21;30(3):339-347. (PMID: 30541263)
    • Contributed Indexing:
      Keywords: Caesarean section; Clinical practice guidelines; Cost saving; Surgical antibiotic prophylaxis; Surgical site infections
    • Accession Number:
      0 (Anti-Bacterial Agents)
    • Publication Date:
      Date Created: 20210113 Date Completed: 20211104 Latest Revision: 20240805
    • Publication Date:
      20240805
    • Accession Number:
      PMC7805169
    • Accession Number:
      10.1186/s13756-020-00843-1
    • Accession Number:
      33436096