To characterize the current state of antifungal stewardship practices and perceptions of antifungal use among pediatric antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs).

We developed and distributed an electronic survey, which included 17 closed-ended questions about institutional antifungal stewardship practices and perceptions, among pediatric ASPs.

ASP physicians and pharmacists of 74 hospitals participating in the multicenter Sharing Antimicrobial Reports for Pediatric Stewardship (SHARPS) Collaborative.

We sent surveys to 74 hospitals and received 68 unique responses, for a response rate of 92%. Overall, 63 of 68 the respondent ASPs (93%) reported that they conduct 1 or more antifungal stewardship activities. Of these 68 hospital ASPs, 43 (63%) perform prospective audit and feedback (PAF) of antifungals. The most common reasons reported for not performing PAF of antifungals were not enough time or resources (19 of 25, 76%) and minimal institutional antifungal use (6 of 25, 24%). Also, 52 hospitals (76%) require preauthorization for 1 or more antifungal agents. The most commonly restricted antifungals were isavuconazole (42 of 52 hospitals, 80%) and posaconazole (39 of 52 hospitals, 75%). Furthermore, 33 ASPs (48%) agreed or strongly agreed that antifungals are inappropriately used at their institution, and only 25 of 68 (37%) of ASPs felt very confident making recommendations about antifungals.

Most pediatric ASPs steward antifungals, but the strategies employed are highly variable across surveyed institutions. Although nearly half of respondents identified inappropriate antifungal use as a problem at their institution, most ASPs do not feel confident making recommendations about antifungals. Future studies are needed to determine the rate of inappropriate antifungal use and the best antifungal stewardship strategies.

To identify predictors of disagreement with antimicrobial stewardship prospective audit and feedback recommendations (PAFR) at a free-standing children’s hospital.

Retrospective cohort study of audits performed during the antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP) from March 30, 2015, to April 17, 2017.

The ASP included audits of antimicrobial use and communicated PAFR to the care team, with follow-up on adherence to recommendations. The primary outcome was disagreement with PAFR. Potential predictors for disagreement, including patient-level, antimicrobial, programmatic, and provider-level factors, were assessed using bivariate and multivariate logistic regression models.

In total, 4,727 antimicrobial audits were performed during the study period; 1,323 PAFR (28%) and 187 recommendations (15%) were not followed due to disagreement. Providers were more likely to disagree with PAFR when the patient had a gastrointestinal infection (odds ratio [OR], 5.50; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.99–15.21), febrile neutropenia (OR, 6.14; 95% CI, 2.08–18.12), skin or soft-tissue infections (OR, 6.16; 95% CI, 1.92–19.77), or had been admitted for 31–90 days at the time of the audit (OR, 2.08; 95% CI, 1.36–3.18). The longer the duration since the attending provider had been trained (ie, the more years of experience), the more likely they were to disagree with PAFR recommendations (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.01–1.04).

Evaluation of our program confirmed patient-level predictors of PAFR disagreement and identified additional programmatic and provider-level factors, including years of attending experience. Stewardship interventions focused on specific diagnoses and antimicrobials are unlikely to result in programmatic success unless these factors are also addressed.

Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2018;806–813