Background/Objectives: There has been a lack of a holistic approach to evaluating antibiotic consumption in Kazakhstan over the past few years using an internationally recognized methodology. Therefore, this study aimed to provide a nationwide evaluation of antibiotic consumption in Kazakhstan during the period 2019–2023. Methods: Defined daily doses per 1000 inhabitants per day (DIDs) were calculated for systemic antibiotics (J01 code of the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical Classification System (ATC)) following the methodology established by the Global Antimicrobial Resistance and Use Surveillance System (GLASS-AMC). The average annual percent change (AAPC) was computed for each chemical agent, pharmacological group, and J01 in general to evaluate past trends in antibiotic consumption. Results: The consumption of J01 antibiotics ranged between 10.869 DIDs (2022) and 14.470 DIDs (2020). There was an increase in antibiotic consumption during 2020 and 2021, but the overall trend was declining, with an AAPC of −2.45%. Azithromycin was the most consumed systemic antibiotic, followed by ceftriaxone and ciprofloxacin. The consumption of “Watch” group antibiotics prevailed in Kazakhstan during the study period, with the number of people consuming the top five “Watch” group antibiotics rising from 72,578 in 2019 to 94,617 in 2023. Conclusions: The findings of this study are crucial for the reorganization of the national antimicrobial stewardship program.

Background: Leadership and organizational climate significantly impact nurses’ effectiveness, especially in the high‐stress environments typical of healthcare institutions. However, toxic leadership characterized by micromanagement and bias can negatively affect employee morale and diminish service quality. Aim: This study aimed to examine how nurse managers’ toxic leadership behaviors influence the quality of life of nurses in Kazakhstan. Methods: This research employed a quantitative, cross‐sectional, and correlational design. The study was conducted at the University Medical Center in Astana, Kazakhstan. A convenience sample of 313 nurses participated in the survey, which included a paper questionnaire with three parts: a participant information sheet, the “Toxic Leadership Behaviors of Nurse Managers Scale” (ToxBH‐NM), and the “World Health Organization Quality of Life” assessments. The demographic characteristics, toxic leadership behaviors of nurse managers, and quality of life were analyzed descriptively. Multiple regression analyses were used to examine the impact of nurse managers’ toxic leadership behaviors on nurses’ quality of life. Results: The findings indicated a generally positive nurse managers’ leadership behaviors ( M = 1.55, SD = 0.83). More than half of the nurses reported an overall quality of life that they described as good (55.3%) and expressed satisfaction with their health (56.2%). Weak to moderate inverse correlations ( r =  0.16 to 0.38, p < 0.001) were found between toxic leadership behaviors and the quality of life of nurses. The four regression models were found to be significant, explaining 15.7% ( R ² = 0.192, adjusted R ² = 0.157), 8.9% ( R ² = 0.127, adjusted R ² = 0.089), 11.8% ( R ² = 0.155, adjusted R ² = 0.118), and 16.0% ( R ² = 0.195, adjusted R ² = 0.160) of the total variance in “physical health” ( F ₁₃ , ₂₉₉ = 5.47, p < 0.001), “psychological health” ( F ₁₃ , ₂₉₉ = 3.34, p < 0.001), “social relationships” ( F ₁₃ , ₂₉₉ = 4.21, p < 0.001), and the “environment domain” ( F ₁₃ , ₂₉₉ = 5.56, p < 0.001). Conclusion: Experiences of humiliating behavior from nurse managers were linked to a poorer quality of life among nurses. Factors such as marital status, the specific hospital where the nurses worked, and the toxic leadership behaviors of nurse managers significantly affected the nurses’ quality of life. Implication for Nursing Management: These findings can serve as a foundation for developing programs that specifically address the toxic leadership behaviors identified in the study, which adversely affect nurses’ quality of life.

Background. Worldwide, hospitals are required to prioritize the culture of quality in infection prevention (CQIP) for patient safety. Assessing CQIP is crucial, but there is limited research, especially regarding nurses’ perceptions. Insufficient information exists due to scarcity of validated instruments in local languages to measure CQIP internationally. Purpose. This study assessed the “Leading a Culture of Quality in Infection Prevention Scale” Russian version’s (LCQ-IPS-R) validity and reliability to assess the CQIP of hospitals in Kazakhstan based on nurses’ perceptions. Methods. This study utilized a methodological design and analyzed data from 204 nurses at the “National Research Center for Maternal and Child Health” in Astana City, Kazakhstan. The “cultural and linguistic adaptation” process involved a “forward-backward translation” technique. Content validity and construct validity were examined. Internal consistency reliability was explored for scale reliability. Results. The scale’s mean item range was from 3.56 (SD = 1.22) to 4.40 (SD = 0.85; SD = 0.92). The corrected item-total correlation ranged from 0.321 to 0.707. Six experts rated the I-CVI from 0.83 to 1.00, with an S-CVI/Ave of 0.90. The principal component analysis with Varimax rotation produced four distinct components of the LCQ-IPS-R, explaining 69.8% of the total variance. The tests of correlation between the LCQ-IPS-R’s four components revealed medium to large positive associations among the components (r = 0.25–0.55, ). The computed α for the LCQ-IPS-R was 0.909 while α values from four subscales ranged from 0.809 to 0.921. Conclusions/Implications for Practice. This study provides evidence of the LCQ-IP-R’s reliability and validity in evaluating Russian-speaking nurses’ perception of their hospital’s CQIP. These findings open the door for further research on CQIP in healthcare settings in Kazakhstan, Central Asia, and other Russian-speaking countries. The scale provides essential baseline information to design effective interventions for achieving hospitals’ infection prevention objectives.