Background. There is limited knowledge of the key determinants of antimicrobial prescribing behavior (APB) in hospitals. An understanding of these determinants is required for the successful design, adoption, and implementation of quality improvement interventions in antimicrobial stewardship programs. Methods. Qualitative semistructured interviews were conducted with doctors (n = 10), pharmacists (n = 10), and nurses and midwives (n = 19) in 4 hospitals in London. Interviews were conducted until thematic saturation was reached. Thematic analysis was applied to the data to identify the key determinants of antimicrobial prescribing behaviors. Results. The APB of healthcare professionals is governed by a set of cultural rules. Antimicrobial prescribing is performed in an environment where the behavior of clinical leaders or seniors influences practice of junior doctors. Senior doctors consider themselves exempt from following policy and practice within a culture of perceived autonomous decision making that relies more on personal knowledge and experience than formal policy. Prescribers identify with the clinical groups in which they work and adjust their APB according to the prevailing practice within these groups. A culture of “noninterference” in the antimicrobial prescribing practice of peers prevents intervention into prescribing of colleagues. These sets of cultural rules demonstrate the existence of a “prescribing etiquette,” which dominates the APB of healthcare professionals. Prescribing etiquette creates an environment in which professional hierarchy and clinical groups act as key determinants of APB. Conclusions. To influence the antimicrobial prescribing of individual healthcare professionals, interventions need to address prescribing etiquette and use clinical leadership within existing clinical groups to influence practice.

The emergence of the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has required an unprecedented response to control the spread of the infection and protect the most vulnerable within society. Whilst the pandemic has focused society on the threat of emerging infections and hand hygiene, certain infection control and antimicrobial stewardship policies may have to be relaxed. It is unclear whether the unintended consequences of these changes will have a net-positive or -negative impact on rates of antimicrobial resistance. Whilst the urgent focus must be on controlling this pandemic, sustained efforts to address the longer-term global threat of antimicrobial resistance should not be overlooked.

At the 2015 World Health Assembly, UN member states adopted a resolution that committed to the development of national action plans (NAPs) for antimicrobial resistance (AMR). The political determination to commit to NAPs and the availability of robust governance structures to assure sustainable translation of the identified NAP objectives from policy to practice remain major barriers to progress. Inter-country variability in economic and political resilience and resource constraints could be fundamental barriers to progressing AMR NAPs. Although there have been regional and global analyses of NAPs from a One Health and policy perspective, a global assessment of the NAP objectives targeting antimicrobial use in human populations is needed. In this Health Policy, we report a systematic evidence synthesis of existing NAPs that are aimed at tackling AMR in human populations. We find marked gaps and variability in maturity of NAP development and operationalisation across the domains of: (1) policy and strategic planning; (2) medicines management and prescribing systems; (3) technology for optimised antimicrobial prescribing; (4) context, culture, and behaviours; (5) operational delivery and monitoring; and (6) patient and public engagement and involvement. The gaps identified in these domains highlight opportunities to facilitate sustainable delivery and operationalisation of NAPs. The findings from this analysis can be used at country, regional, and global levels to identify AMR-related priorities that are relevant to infrastructure needs and contexts.

Background. Antimicrobial use in acute care is widely reported to be suboptimal. Inappropriate use of antimicrobials is a major contributing factor to the emergence of multidrug resistance and health care–associated infection. Addressing prescribing behavior is a key component of antimicrobial stewardship. Methods. We performed a novel systematic review of both qualitative and quantitative literature on antimicrobial prescribing behavior in acute care. We assessed the extent to which behavioral sciences and social marketing were used and whether this could be related to the effectiveness of reported outcomes. MEDLINE, Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE), Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts (ASSIA), Business Source Complete, The Cochrane Library, PsychInfo, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness (DARE) and Health Management Information Consortium (HMIC) were searched for studies undertaken during the period January 1999–April 2011 and published in English. Results. Five qualitative and 5 quantitative studies met the quality criteria. Qualitative studies highlight the predominant influence of social norms, attitudes, and beliefs on antimicrobial prescribing behavior. Quantitative studies reporting interventions to optimize antimicrobial prescribing behavior do not use theoretical science or primary research to inform the design and choice of the interventions deployed. Conclusions. Despite qualitative evidence demonstrating the impact of behavioral determinants and social norms on prescribing, these influences are not given due consideration in the design and evaluation of interventions. To ensure a better understanding of prescribing behaviors and to improve the quality of interventions and research in this area, the incorporation and application of behavioral sciences supported by appropriate multidisciplinary collaboration is recommended.

There has been dramatic change in antibiotic use in English hospitals. Data from 2004 and 2009 show that the focus on reducing fluoroquinolone and second- and third-generation cephalosporin use seems to have been heeded in NHS secondary care, and has been associated with a substantial decline in hospital Clostridium difficile rates. However, there has been a substantial increase in use of co-amoxiclav, carbapenems and piperacillin/tazobactam. In primary care, antibiotic prescribing fell markedly from 1995 to 2000, but has since risen steadily to levels seen in the early 1990s. There remains a 2-fold variation in antimicrobial prescribing among English General Practices. In 2010, the NHS Atlas of Variation documented a 3-fold variation in the prescription of quinolones and an 18-fold variation in cephalosporins by Primary Care Trusts across England. There is a clear need to improve antimicrobial prescribing. This paper describes the development of new antimicrobial stewardship programmes for primary care and hospitals by the Department of Health's Advisory Committee on Antimicrobial Resistance and Healthcare Associated Infection: Antimicrobial Stewardship in Primary Care Initiative. The secondary care programme promotes the rapid prescription of the right antibiotic at the right dose at the right time, followed by active review for all patients still on antibiotics 48 h after admission. The five options available are to stop, switch to oral, continue and review again, change (if possible to a narrower spectrum) or move to outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy. A range of audit and outcome tools has been developed, but to maintain optimal antimicrobial usage, monitoring of local and national quantitative and qualitative data on prescribing and consumption is required, linked to the development of key performance indicators in primary, secondary and tertiary care.