Infections related to implantable cardiac electronic devices (ICEDs), including pacemakers, implantable cardiac defibrillators and cardiac resynchronization therapy devices, are increasing in incidence in the USA and are likely to increase in the UK, because more devices are being implanted. These devices have both intravascular and extravascular components and infection can involve the generator, device leads and native cardiac structures or various combinations. ICED infections can be life-threatening, particularly when associated with endocardial infection, and all-cause mortality of up to 35% has been reported. Like infective endocarditis, ICED infections can be difficult to diagnose and manage. This guideline aims to (i) improve the quality of care provided to patients with ICEDs, (ii) provide an educational resource for all relevant healthcare professionals, (iii) encourage a multidisciplinary approach to ICED infection management, (iv) promote a standardized approach to the diagnosis, management, surveillance and prevention of ICED infection through pragmatic evidence-rated recommendations, and (v) advise on future research projects/audit. The guideline is intended to assist in the clinical care of patients with suspected or confirmed ICED infection in the UK, to inform local infection prevention and treatment policies and guidelines and to be used in the development of educational and training material by the relevant professional societies. The questions covered by the guideline are presented at the beginning of each section.

The control of Clostridium difficile infections is an international clinical challenge. The incidence of C difficile in England declined by roughly 80% after 2006, following the implementation of national control policies; we tested two hypotheses to investigate their role in this decline. First, if C difficile infection declines in England were driven by reductions in use of particular antibiotics, then incidence of C difficile infections caused by resistant isolates should decline faster than that caused by susceptible isolates across multiple genotypes. Second, if C difficile infection declines were driven by improvements in hospital infection control, then transmitted (secondary) cases should decline regardless of susceptibility. Regional (Oxfordshire and Leeds, UK) and national data for the incidence of C difficile infections and antimicrobial prescribing data (1998-2014) were combined with whole genome sequences from 4045 national and international C difficile isolates. Genotype (multilocus sequence type) and fluoroquinolone susceptibility were determined from whole genome sequences. The incidence of C difficile infections caused by fluoroquinolone-resistant and fluoroquinolone-susceptible isolates was estimated with negative-binomial regression, overall and per genotype. Selection and transmission were investigated with phylogenetic analyses. National fluoroquinolone and cephalosporin prescribing correlated highly with incidence of C difficile infections (cross-correlations >0·88), by contrast with total antibiotic prescribing (cross-correlations 0·2). Restricting fluoroquinolone prescribing appears to explain the decline in incidence of C difficile infections, above other measures, in Oxfordshire and Leeds, England. Antimicrobial stewardship should be a central component of C difficile infection control programmes. UK Clinical Research Collaboration (Medical Research Council, Wellcome Trust, National Institute for Health Research); NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre; NIHR Health Protection Research Unit on Healthcare Associated Infection and Antimicrobial Resistance (Oxford University in partnership with Public Health England [PHE]), and on Modelling Methodology (Imperial College, London in partnership with PHE); and the Health Innovation Challenge Fund.

Objectives: To report the extent and components of global efforts in antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) in hospitals. Methods: An Internet-based survey comprising 43 questions was disseminated worldwide in 2012. Results: Responses were received from 660 hospitals in 67 countries: Africa, 44; Asia, 50; Europe, 361; North America, 72; Oceania, 30; and South and Central America, 103. National AMS standards existed in 52% of countries, 4% were planning them and 58% had an AMS programme. The main barriers to implementing AMS programmes were perceived to be a lack of funding or personnel, a lack of information technology and prescriber opposition. In hospitals with an existing AMS programme, AMS rounds existed in 64%; 81% restricted antimicrobials (carbapenems, 74.3%; quinolones, 64%; and cephalosporins, 58%); and 85% reported antimicrobial usage, with 55% linking data to resistance rates and 49% linking data to infection rates. Only 20% had electronic prescribing for all patients. A total of 89% of programmes educated their medical, nursing and pharmacy staff on AMS. Of the hospitals, 38% had formally reviewed their AMS programme: reductions were reported by 96% of hospitals for inappropriate prescribing, 86% for broad-spectrum antibiotic use, 80% for expenditure, 71% for healthcare-acquired infections, 65% for length of stay or mortality and 58% for bacterial resistance. Conclusions: The worldwide development and implementation of AMS programmes varies considerably. Our results should inform and encourage the further evaluation of this with a view to promoting a worldwide stewardship framework. The prospective measurement of well-defined outcomes of the impact of these programmes remains a significant challenge.

To learn about medical students' knowledge of and perspectives on antibiotic prescribing and resistance, with the aim of helping to develop educational programmes. Final-year students at seven European medical schools were invited to participate in an online survey in 2012. The response rate was 35% (338/961). Most students (74%) wanted more education on choosing antibiotic treatments. Students at all schools felt most confident in diagnosing an infection and least confident in choosing combination therapies, choosing the correct dose and interval of administration and not prescribing in cases of diagnostic uncertainty. Students felt that too many prescriptions and too much broad-spectrum antibiotic use were the most important contributors to resistance; some (24%) believed poor hand hygiene was not at all important. Most students (92%) believed that resistance is a national problem. Most (66%) felt that the antibiotics they would prescribe would contribute to resistance, and almost all (98%) felt that resistance would be a greater problem in the future. Most students (83%) incorrectly thought that rates of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bacteraemia had significantly increased over the past decade in their countries. There was little appreciation of the relative burden of resistance in Europe compared with road traffic accidents (around two to three times greater mortality) and lung cancer (around 10 times greater mortality). Students wanted further education on antibiotic prescribing, and areas of lack of confidence were found. Students overestimated the current burden of resistant bacteria and were unaware of successes in reducing MRSA infections. Educational and stewardship programmes may benefit from including more cases of diagnostic uncertainty, and highlighting successes such as MRSA prevention, as evidence for the importance of current interventions.

Background: The prevalence of reported penicillin allergy (PenA) and the impact these records have on health outcomes in the UK general population are unknown. Without such data, justifying and planning enhanced allergy services is challenging.Objectives: To determine: (i) prevalence of PenA records; (ii) patient characteristics associated with PenA records; and (iii) impact of PenA records on antibiotic prescribing/health outcomes in primary care.Methods: We carried out cross-sectional/retrospective cohort studies using patient-level data from electronic health records. Cohort study: exact matching across confounders identified as affecting PenA records. Setting: English NHS general practices between 1 April 2013 and 31 March 2014. Participants: 2.3 million adult patients. Outcome measures: prevalence of PenA, antibiotic prescribing, mortality, MRSA infection/colonization and Clostridioides difficile infection.Results: PenA prevalence was 5.9% (IQR = 3.8%–8.2%). PenA records were more common in older people, females and those with a comorbidity, and were affected by GP practice. Antibiotic prescribing varied significantly: penicillins were prescribed less frequently in those with a PenA record [relative risk (RR) = 0.15], and macrolides (RR = 4.03), tetracyclines (RR = 1.91) nitrofurantoin (RR = 1.09), trimethoprim (RR = 1.04), cephalosporins (RR = 2.05), quinolones (RR = 2.10), clindamycin (RR = 5.47) and total number of prescriptions were increased in patients with a PenA record. Risk of re-prescription of a new antibiotic class within 28 days (RR = 1.32), MRSA infection/colonization (RR = 1.90) and death during the year subsequent to 1 April 2013 (RR = 1.08) increased in those with PenA records.Conclusions: PenA records are common in the general population and associated with increased/altered antibiotic prescribing and worse health outcomes. We estimate that incorrect PenA records affect 2.7 million people in England. Establishing true PenA status (e.g. oral challenge testing) would allow more people to be prescribed first-line antibiotics, potentially improving health outcomes.