Antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) has emerged as a systematic approach to optimize antimicrobial use and reduce antimicrobial resistance. To support the implementation of AMS programs, the World Health Organization developed a draft toolkit for health care facility AMS programs in low- and middle-income countries. A feasibility study was conducted in Bhutan, the Federated States of Micronesia, Malawi, and Nepal to obtain local input on toolkit content and implementation of AMS programs. This descriptive qualitative study included semi-structured interviews with national- and facility-level stakeholders. Respondents identified AMS as a priority and perceived the draft toolkit as a much-needed document to further AMS program implementation. Facilitators for implementing AMS included strong national and facility leadership and clinical staff engagement. Barriers included lack of human and financial resources, inadequate regulations for prescription antibiotic sales, and insufficient AMS training. Action items for AMS implementation included improved laboratory surveillance, establishment of a stepwise approach for implementation, and mechanisms for reporting and feedback. Recommendations to improve the AMS toolkit’s content included additional guidance on defining the responsibilities of the committees and how to prioritize AMS programming based on local context. The AMS toolkit was perceived to be an important asset as countries and health care facilities move forward to implement AMS programs.

Antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) programs can decrease non-optimal use of antibiotics in hospital settings. There are limited data on AMS programs in burn and chronic wound centers in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). A post-prescription review and feedback (PPRF) program was implemented in three hospitals in Nepal with a focus on wound and burn care. A total of 241 baseline and 236 post-intervention patient chart data were collected from three hospitals. There was a significant decrease in utilizing days of therapy per 1000 patient days (DOT/1000 PD) of penicillin (p = 0.02), aminoglycoside (p < 0.001), and cephalosporin (p = 0.04). Increases in DOT/1000 PD at post-intervention were significant for metronidazole (p < 0.001), quinolone (p = 0.01), and other antibiotics (p < 0.001). Changes in use of antibiotics varied across hospitals, e.g., cephalosporin use decreased significantly at Kirtipur Hospital (p < 0.001) and Pokhara Academy of Health Sciences (p = 0.02), but not at Kathmandu Model Hospital (p = 0.59). An independent review conducted by infectious disease specialists at the Henry Ford Health System revealed significant changes in antibiotic prescribing practices both overall and by hospital. There was a decrease in mean number of intravenous antibiotic days between baseline (10.1 (SD 8.8)) and post-intervention (8.8 (SD 6.5)) (t = 3.56; p < 0.001), but no difference for oral antibiotics. Compared to baseline, over the 6-month post-intervention period, we found an increase in justified use of antibiotics (p < 0.001), de-escalation (p < 0.001), accurate documentation (p < 0.001), and adherence to the study antibiotic prescribing guidelines at 72 h (p < 0.001) and after diagnoses (p < 0.001). The evaluation data presented provide evidence that PPRF training and program implementation can contribute to hospital-based antibiotic stewardship for wound and burn care in Nepal.

Capacity building is needed in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) to combat antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Stewardship programs such as post-prescription review and feedback (PPRF) are important components in addressing AMR. Little data are available regarding effectiveness of PPRF programs in LMIC settings. An adapted PPRF program was implemented in the medicine, surgery, and obstetrics/gynecology wards in a 125-bed hospital in Kathmandu. Seven “physician champions” were trained. Baseline and post-intervention patient chart data were analyzed for changes in days of therapy (DOT) and mean number of course days for intravenous and oral antibiotics, and for specific study antibiotics. Charts were independently reviewed to determine justification for prescribed antibiotics. Physician champions documented recommendations. Days of therapy per 1,000 patient-days for courses of aminoglycoside (P < 0.001) and cephalosporin (P < 0.001) decreased. In the medicine ward, data indicate increased justified use of antibiotics (P = 0.02), de-escalation (P < 0.001), rational use of antibiotics (P < 0.01), and conforming to guidelines in the first 72 hours (P = 0.02), and for definitive therapy (P < 0.001). Physician champions documented 437 patient chart reviews and made 138 recommendations; 78.3% of recommendations were followed by the attending physician. Post-prescription review and feedback can be successfully implemented in LMIC hospitals, which often lack infectious disease specialists. Future program adaptation and training will focus on identifying additional stewardship programming and support mechanisms to optimize antibiotic use in LMICs.

Background: The overuse of broad-spectrum antibiotics drives antimicrobial resistance (AMR), and the prevalence of highly-resistant Gram-negative infections is increasing across the world, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). Carbapenem resistance is of particular concern since these are often the last line agents. Antimicrobial restriction is an antimicrobial stewardship intervention (AMS) that aims to reduce the use of broad-spectrum antibiotics to preserve antimicrobial susceptibility. Methods: This is retrospective, observational study of antibiotic consumption and prevalence of antibiotic resistance of bacterial isolates from inpatients at Jigme Dorji Wangchuck National Referral Hospital, a 350-bed multi-specialty hospital in Thimphu, Bhutan. Antibiotic consumption and antimicrobial susceptibility were monitored from January 2015 to December 2017 by the pharmacy department and the microbiology lab, respectively. Antibiotic consumption was measured using defined daily doses (DDD) and expressed as DDDs per 1,000 persons per day. The antibiotic susceptibility was determined using the Clinical Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) guideline. A hospital AMS program with multidisciplinary team and good hospital managerial/ leadership support were initiated in 2016 and interventions included antimicrobial restrictions, educations, guidelines for use, post prescription review, de-escalation, audit and feedback. Results: From 2015 to 2016, the DDDs of carbapenems and piperacillin–tazobactam (PTZ) increased while ceftriaxone decreased (Figure 1). After the AMS program was implemented in 2016, the annual DDDs of carbapenems decreased while PTZ and ceftriaxone increased. Antimicrobial susceptibility of Klebsiella pneumoniae and Escheriachia coli blood isolates to carbapenems and ceftriaxone increased from 2016 to 2017: 50/61 (82%) vs. 45/49 (92%) and 24/91 (26%) vs. 31/92 (34%), respectively. Conclusion: Implementing an AMS program that restricted the use of carbapenems resulted in a decrease in carbapenem use and increased antimicrobial susceptibility for carbapenems and ceftriaxone. AMS interventions can be successful to decrease carbapenem-resistance in LMIC.