Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-59b7f5684b-gsnzm Total loading time: 0.791 Render date: 2022-09-29T02:09:17.413Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "displayNetworkTab": true, "displayNetworkMapGraph": false, "useSa": true } hasContentIssue true

A national study of antibiotic use in Greek pediatric hematology oncology and bone marrow transplant units

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 April 2022

Elpis Mantadakis*
Affiliation:
Democritus University of Thrace Faculty of Medicine, University General Hospital of Alexandroupolis, Alexandroupolis, Greece
Ioannis Kopsidas
Affiliation:
Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Outcomes Research (CLEO), Athens, Greece
Susan Coffin
Affiliation:
Division of Infectious Diseases and Center for Pediatric Clinical Effectiveness, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States
Gabriel Dimitriou
Affiliation:
Patras Medical School, University General Hospital of Patras, Patra, Greece
Despoina Gkentzi
Affiliation:
Patras Medical School, University General Hospital of Patras, Patra, Greece
Emmanouel Hatzipantelis
Affiliation:
Children & Adolescent Hematology–Oncology Unit, Second Pediatric Department, School of Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece
Aikaterini Kaisari
Affiliation:
Stem Cell Transplant Unit, Aghia Sophia Children’s Hospital, Athens, Greece
Antonis Kattamis
Affiliation:
First Department of Pediatrics, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Aghia Sophia Children’s Hospital, Athens, Greece
Eleni Kourkouni
Affiliation:
Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Outcomes Research (CLEO), Athens, Greece
Smaragda Papachristidou
Affiliation:
Oncology Department, “P & A Kyriakou” Children’s Hospital, Athens, Greece
Evgenia Papakonstantinou
Affiliation:
Department of Pediatric Oncology, Hipppokration General Hospital, Thessaloniki, Greece
Sophia Polychronopoulou
Affiliation:
Department of Pediatric Hematology–Oncology (T.A.O.), Aghia Sophia Children’s Hospital, Athens, Greece
Emmanuel Roilides
Affiliation:
Third Department of Pediatrics, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Hipppokration General Hospital, Thessaloniki, Greece
Nikos Spyridis
Affiliation:
Infectious Diseases Unit, Second Department of Pediatrics, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens (NKUA), Athens, Greece
Sotirios Tsiodras
Affiliation:
Fourth Department of Internal Medicine, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Attikon Hospital, Athens, Greece
Maria N. Tsolia
Affiliation:
Infectious Diseases Unit, Second Department of Pediatrics, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens (NKUA), Athens, Greece
Grammatiki-Christina Tsopela
Affiliation:
Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Outcomes Research (CLEO), Athens, Greece
Theoklis Zaoutis
Affiliation:
Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Outcomes Research (CLEO), Athens, Greece Infectious Diseases Unit, Second Department of Pediatrics, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens (NKUA), Athens, Greece
Athanasios Tragiannidis
Affiliation:
Children & Adolescent Hematology–Oncology Unit, Second Pediatric Department, School of Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece
*
Author for correspondence: Elpis Mantadakis, MD, PhD, Pediatric Hematology–Oncology, Department of Pediatrics, University General Hospital of Alexandroupolis, 6th Kilometer Alexandroupolis-Makris, 68100, Alexandroupolis, Thrace, Greece. E-mail: emantada@med.duth.gr

Abstract

Objective:

We surveyed antimicrobials used in Greek pediatric hematology–oncology (PHO) and bone marrow transplant (BMT) units before and after an intervention involving education regarding the 2017 clinical practice guidelines (CPG) for the management of febrile neutropenia in children with cancer and hematopoietic stem-cell transplant recipients.

Design:

Antibiotic prescribing practices were prospectively recorded between June 2016 and November 2017.

Intervention:

In December 2017, baseline data feedback was provided, and CPG education was provided. Prescribing practices were followed for one more year. For antibiotic stewardship, days of therapy, and length of therapy were calculated.

Setting:

Five of the 6 PHO units in Greece and the single pediatric BMT unit participated.

Participants:

Admitted children in each unit who received the first 15 new antibiotic courses each month.

Results:

Administration of ≥4 antibiotics simultaneously and administration of antibiotics with overlapping activity for ≥2 days were significantly more common in PHO units in general hospitals compared to children’s hospitals. Use of at least 1 antifungal was recorded in ∼47% of the patients before and after the intervention. De-escalation and/or discontinuation of antibiotics on day 6 of initial treatment increased significantly from 43% to 53.5% (P = .032). Although the number of patients requiring intensive care support for sepsis did not change, a significant drop was noted in all-cause mortality (P = .008).

Conclusions:

We recorded the antibiotic prescribing practices in Greek PHO and BMT units, we achieved improved prescribing with a simple intervention, and we identified areas in need of improvement.

Type
Original Article
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America

The overuse of antimicrobials, the emergence of antimicrobial resistance worldwide, and increasing healthcare-associated costs have shown the importance of maximizing the application of antibiotic stewardship programs (ASPs), which help to maintain the efficacy of currently existing antibiotics and lead to substantial cost savings. Reference Bio, Kruger and Lee1,Reference Abbo and Ariza-Heredia2 This issue is particularly important for children with cancer, who frequently require antibiotics during periods of febrile neutropenia. Reference Lehrnbecher, Phillips and Alexander3,Reference Schmidt-Hieber, Teschner and Maschmeyer4

In pediatric hematology–oncology (PHO) units, evidence-based use of antibiotics and antibiotic de-escalation strategies have the potential to decrease unnecessarily prolonged use of broad-spectrum antibiotics, Reference Gyssens, Kern and Livermore5 but such measures have not been studied extensively. Reference Dommett, Geary and Freeman6 The few published studies have shown that in hematology–oncology units, antibiotic de-escalation and discontinuation can be safely implemented. Reference Paskovaty, Pastores and Gedrimaite7Reference Pillinger, Bouchard and Withers10 For example, a clinical trial in 6 academic hospitals in Spain showed that in adults with hematological malignancies, high-risk febrile neutropenia, and negative blood cultures, empirical antimicrobial therapy can be safely discontinued after 72 hours of apyrexia and clinical recovery irrespective of the absolute neutrophil count (ANC). Reference Aguilar-Guisado, Espigado and Martín-Peña11

In Greece, nearly 300 pediatric oncology patients aged 0–14 years are diagnosed annually. Additionally, ∼12 children with nonmalignant diseases require hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) annually. There are 6 PHO units in Greece: 3 units in Athens, 2 units in Thessaloniki, and 1 unit in Heraklion. In addition, there is a single pediatric bone marrow transplant (BMT) unit in Athens. All PHO units in Athens are in children’s hospitals, and the units in Thessaloniki and Heraklion are in general university hospitals.

Since 2016, as part of the project Preventing Hospital Infections in Greece (PHIG), the Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Outcomes Research (CLEO) has been monitoring the use of antimicrobials in Greek PHO units. Reference Karagiannidou, Triantafyllou and Zaoutis12,Reference Lehrnbecher, Robinson and Fisher13 The goals of this study were to describe the use of antibiotics in hospitalized children with cancer and pediatric HSCT recipients in Greece and to evaluate the impact of a simple multifaceted intervention on prescribing practices.

Methods

Of the 6 PHO units in Greece, 5 of these units and the country’s single pediatric BMT unit participated in this project. Beginning at the end of June 2016, all participating units prospectively recorded the first 15 children admitted per month who required the initiation of new antibiotics for treatment or prophylaxis. Ethics approval was obtained from the institutional review boards of all participating hospitals.

Data collection

Children who had already been on intravenous antibiotics the day before the initiation of the new antibiotic regimen were excluded. Administration of any antifungal therapy in a child with febrile neutropenia was recorded as empirical therapy. No pediatric patient was recorded twice within the same month, and the form was completed for the first 7 days of antibiotic administration.

We collected the following data: age and sex, presence of central lines, type of underlying disease (ie, hematologic malignancy, solid tumor, or other disease), ANC and its relation to the first day of antibiotic therapy, antibiotics used and their indication (ie, empirical or targeted therapy, perioperative or other prophylaxis), cultures obtained, pathogens isolated, presence or absence of invasive fungal disease, and clinical outcome (ie, hospital discharge, intensive care unit [ICU] admission, or death).

In December 2017, a meeting between CLEO representatives and the directors of all PHO units took place. A baseline data analysis and the main conclusions were presented. Finally, the goal of implementing the International Pediatric Fever and Neutropenia Guideline Panel’s clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for the management of febrile neutropenia in children with cancer and HSCT recipients, which had recently been updated, was also discussed. Reference Lehrnbecher, Robinson and Fisher13 The time frame and the goals of the PHIG intervention are shown in Figure 1. Reference Vicente, Al-Nahedh and Parsad14Reference Tomiak, Yau and Huan16 For febrile neutropenia, the definition of the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) was used. Reference Freifeld, Bow and Sepkowitz17

Fig. 1. Time frame and goals of the Preventing Hospital Infections in Greece (PHIG) intervention in 5 Greek pediatric hematology–oncology (PHO) units and 1 bone marrow transplant (BMT) unit.

PHIG intervention

Surveillance of antibiotic use and the implementation of the CPGs started in December 2017 in 5 of the units. In one unit, surveillance and intervention started in March 2018 due to local resource restrictions; another unit, due to limited resources, participated in data collection only during the pre-intervention period (June 2016 to November 2017). The same demographic and clinical data were recorded in the 2-year postintervention period (January 2018–December 2019) to compare antimicrobial use before and after implementation of the CPGs. Reference Lehrnbecher, Robinson and Fisher13 In all participating units, a feedback report was sent every 6 months throughout the study period to inform each unit about its specific progress with respect to the implementation of the CPGs.

Data analysis

For the purposes of antibiotic stewardship, we calculated days of therapy (DOT) and length of therapy (LOT). Reference Morris18,Reference Dalton, MacTavish and Bresee19 One DOT represents the administration of a single antibiotic on a given calendar day, even if multiple doses are given on that day. The number of days a patient is receiving antibiotics, regardless of the number of different agents administered, constitutes LOT. We compared data for the following factors: (1) administration of ≥4 antibiotics simultaneously, (2) use of antibiotics with overlapping antimicrobial activity for ≥2 days, (3) de-escalation or discontinuation with negative cultures by day 6, (4) start of antibiotics without obtaining cultures, (4) antibiotic initiation without a clear source or fever and with ANC > 500/μL, (5) use of standard versus other nonstandard regimens for empirical therapy (defined as cephalosporins without anti-Pseudomonas activity, such as ceftriaxone and cefotaxime, ceftazidime monotherapy, colistin, metronidazole, and others), (6) early use of antifungals before day 4 of fever, (7) number of patients admitted for sepsis to ICU, and (8) number of deaths before and after the PHIG intervention.

Statistical analysis

Nominal variables are presented with absolute and relative (%) frequencies, whereas continuous variables are presented with medians and interquartile ranges. To evaluate differences between units and the effect of the intervention, χ Reference Abbo and Ariza-Heredia2 tests of independence and Mann-Whitney U tests were performed, as appropriate. Stratified analysis by unit and type of unit was also performed. All reported P values were based on 2-sided tests, and statistical significance was set at P < .05. All statistical analyses were performed with Stata version 13.0 software (StataCorp, College Station, TX).

Results

Cohort characteristics

Demographic and clinical characteristics of recorded cases by PHO unit and location in a children’s or general hospital are shown in Table 1. Children hospitalized in PHO units in general hospitals were significantly younger than children hospitalized in children’s hospitals: children’s hospitals (median, 7.5 years; IQR, 3.6–12.3) versus general hospitals (median, 5.4 years; IQR, 3.1–8.5) (P = .001).

Table 1. Demographic and clinical characteristics of cases hospitalized in the six participating PHO units.

*Other: Aplastic anemia, Fanconi anemia, β-thalassemia, immunodeficiencies (Wiskott Aldrich syndrome, chronic granulomatous disease, severe congenital neutropenia), Langerhans cell histiocytosis, Hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis, osteopetrosis, mitochondrial neurogastrointestinal encephalomyopathy.

Antibiotic use

Patient and antibiotic days, LOT per 1,000 patient days, DOT-to-LOT ratios, and most used antibiotics during the study period by PHO unit and by type of hospital (children’s vs general) are shown in Table 2. Ceftazidime was commonly used in PHO units in general hospitals, whereas piperacillin-tazobactam monotherapy was commonly used in the BMT unit. After the intervention, ceftazidime use decreased from 19% to 1.1% in the 2 PHO units in general hospitals and remained low in units in children’s hospitals throughout the surveillance period (ie, 0.2% before the intervention and 0.4% after intervention). Regarding the use of glycopeptides, their use remained high and essentially unchanged after the intervention. More specifically, glycopeptide use was 30.4% both prior to and after the intervention in PHO units in general hospitals, and this rate increased slightly after the intervention from 24.9% to 27.2% in PHO units in children’s hospitals.

Table 2. Use of antibiotics before (PRE) and after (POST) PHIG intervention. Unit 4 did not participate in data collection after intervention.

Amik/Genta=Amikacin/Gentamycin; Ceft/Cefotax=Ceftriaxone/Cefotaxime; Cipro/Levo= Ciprofloxacin/ Levofloxacin; Pip/Tazo= Piperacillin/Tazobactam Vanc/Teico=Vancomycin/Teicoplanin.

Redundant antibiotic use

The results of the PHIG intervention in relation to other study goals are summarized in Table 3. Overall, the simultaneous administration of ≥4 antibiotics remained unchanged at 4.1% before and after the intervention. However, this rate changed from 2.2% to 0.9% in PHO units in children’s hospitals and from 8.2% to 11.2% in units in general hospitals. Both the pre- and postintervention comparisons of the simultaneous use of ≥4 antibiotics between units by type of hospital were highly significant (P = .001 for both). The overall administration of antibiotics with overlapping activity for ≥2 days did not change significantly (4.5% before and 5.4% after the intervention; P = .39). This rate decreased from 3.5% to 2.1% in units in children’s hospitals but increased from 6.7% to 12.5% in units in general hospitals. Again, the pre- and postintervention comparisons of the administration of antibiotics with overlapping activity for ≥2 days between units by type of hospital were highly significant (P = .034 and P = .001, respectively). Notably, all study goals improved in unit 2 after the intervention (Table 3).

Table 3. Administration of ≥ 4 antibiotics simultaneously, use of antibiotics with overlapping activity for ≥2 days, start of empirical therapy without obtaining cultures and antibiotic initiation without clear source or fever and with ANC>500/μl before and after PHIG intervention.

*TMP/SMX: Trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole (cotrimoxazole).

Antibiotic use for febrile neutropenia

The antibiotic use rates on day 1 of febrile neutropenia before and after the PHIG intervention are shown in Supplementary Table S1. Major differences in practice existed between different units prior to intervention. In units 1 and 2, triple antibiotic therapy (ie, an antipseudomonal β-lactam, a second gram-negative agent, and a gram-positive agent) was commonly practiced. In the BMT unit, monotherapy with an antipseudomonal β-lactam was more commonly used. In unit 5, double gram-negative coverage was used, and in unit 6, triple antibiotic therapy and other nonstandard regimens were frequently used. Significant improvements in antibiotic prescribing were noted after the intervention (P = .005). For all units combined, antibiotic therapy was started without obtaining cultures less frequently after the intervention (14.1% before vs 9.8% after; P = .006). This practice was more frequent in PHO units in general compared to children’s hospitals before the intervention (25.5% vs 9%; P = .001) and after the intervention (18.2% vs 5.8%; P = .001).

De-escalation of antibiotic therapy

In cases of negative blood cultures in patients receiving antibiotics with gram-positive coverage and/or a second antibiotic with gram-negative coverage, de-escalation and/or discontinuation of antibiotics on day 6 in all units significantly increased from 43% to 53.5% (P = .032). This rate of discontinuation increased from 53.1% to 60.2% in units in children’s hospitals and from 15.1% to 28.3% in units in general hospitals.

Antibiotic initiation without a clear infectious source or fever and with ANC >500/μL occurred during the preintervention period in 4.1% of antibiotic courses and in the postintervention period in 3% of antibiotic courses (P = .198). In PHO units in children’s hospitals, this rate decreased from 3.7% to 3%, and in PHO units in general hospitals, this rate decreased from 5% to 3%.

Use of nonstandard antibiotic regimens

The overall use of nonstandard antibiotic regimens was not significantly different after the intervention (11.9% before vs 12.7% after). However, the use of nonstandard antibiotic regimens was significantly more frequent in PHO units in general hospitals than in children’s hospitals prior to the intervention (P = .001) and remained so after the intervention (P = .001). Furthermore, triple antibiotic therapy decreased in units 1 and 2; monotherapy with an antipseudomonal β-lactam decreased in the BMT unit; and triple antibiotic therapy and nonstandard antibiotic combinations decreased in unit 6.

Antifungal use

The use of antifungals in PHO units before and after the PHIG intervention is shown in Supplementary Table S2. Overall, 47.4% of patients before the intervention and 46.9% after the intervention received at least 1 antifungal medication (P = .893). Almost all patients treated in the BMT unit were receiving at least 1 antifungal medication at the time of data collection. Almost 66% of children treated in units in general hospitals were receiving at least 1 antifungal medication, compared with ∼25% of patients treated in units in children’s hospitals. Overall, the use of at least 1 antifungal medication was significantly more common in PHO units in general versus children’s hospitals before the intervention (66% vs 40.9%; P = .001) and remained so after the intervention (73% vs 36.2%; P = .001).

Outcomes (ICU admissions and deaths)

The number of patients requiring ICU support for sepsis did not change significantly: 18 patients (2.13%) before intervention versus 23 patients (2.33%) after the intervention (P = .781). We noted a significant decrease the number of deaths in all PHO units combined: 36 deaths (4.29%) before the intervention versus 21 deaths (2.13%) after the intervention (P = .008).

Discussion

We prospectively recorded inpatient antibiotic use in pediatric oncology patients and HSCT recipients hospitalized in 5 of the 6 PHO units and in the single BMT unit in Greece. These units treat >92% of children with hematologic and oncologic diseases in the country, so these data can be considered highly representative of the whole country. The distribution of underlying diseases differed significantly by unit, likely because patients with diagnoses other than hematologic malignancies and solid tumors were almost exclusively treated in hospitals in Athens, predominantly in the BMT unit.

The first goal of this study was to document the use of antibiotics in PHO units throughout Greece. The second goal was to educate the medical personnel of all PHO units on the evidence-based management of febrile neutropenia in children with cancer and HSCT recipients, according to the updated international CPG on febrile neutropenia. Reference Lehrnbecher, Robinson and Fisher13 For the latter goal, feedback reports were sent regularly to all participants to inform them about their specific progress.

In our study, LOT per 1,000 patient days slightly decreased after the intervention from 517 to 501. During the same period, we noted a highly significant decrease in the number of deaths in all PHO units combined. The number of patients requiring ICU support for sepsis did not change significantly despite the overall decreased use of antibiotics. The fact that ICU admissions did not increase despite the use of fewer antibiotics is a strong indication that our intervention was safe. However, improved care and increased expertise resulting from the implementation of oncology protocols are other possible reasons for the drop in overall mortality.

The use of ceftazidime decreased after the intervention. Notably, most Greek hospitals harbor multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa with decreased susceptibility to ceftazidime. Reference Feretzakis, Loupelis and Sakagianni20,Reference Maraki, Mantadakis and Nioti21 The goal of decreasing the use of glycopeptides was not achieved; their use represented 25%–30% of antibiotic DOT before and after the intervention. This failure is indicative of the difficulties frequently encountered in the practical implementation of evidence-based antibiotic guidelines. Established and unproven practices are difficult to modify, especially from physicians without adequate training in antibiotic stewardship.

Based on IDSA and the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America guidelines, Reference Dellit, Owens and McGowan22 these data are insufficient to recommend combination antibiotic therapy as routine to prevent the emergence of resistance, although empirical combination therapy is important for critically ill patients at risk of infection with multidrug-resistant pathogens. In addition, de-escalation and/or discontinuation of empirical antimicrobial therapy based on culture results, and the elimination of redundant combination therapy, are highly recommended and can result in decreased antimicrobial exposure and substantial cost savings. Reference Dellit, Owens and McGowan22 As a result, a goal of the PHIG intervention was to minimize redundant combination antibiotic therapy. This goal was partially achieved: the administration of ≥4 antibiotics simultaneously and of redundant combination therapy decreased in units in children’s hospitals but increased in units in general hospitals. The reasons for the remarkable improvement in antibiotic use in unit 2 are unclear, although the availability of adequate medical personnel likely played a role.

Overall, the reasons for these inconsistent changes are uncertain. We speculate that the involvement of pediatric infectious disease specialists was higher in units in children’s hospitals. Another possible explanation is that on-call physicians treating patients with febrile neutropenia in general hospitals are more likely to choose more aggressive antibiotic therapies than those needed for lower-risk patients with febrile neutropenia. The latter was shown to be the case in the management of adults with febrile neutropenia in an urban tertiary-care teaching hospital in the United States that provides emergency and inpatient services to a large comprehensive cancer center. Reference Baugh, Wang and Caterino23 It could be argued that unit antibiograms show higher rates of resistance in units situated within general hospitals compared to units in children’s hospitals. However, to our knowledge, no such data exist because PHO units are not typically located within general hospitals outside Greece. Another possible explanation is that general hospitals likely harbor more drug-resistant bacteria, necessitating more aggressive empirical antibiotic therapy, as had been previously shown for uropathogens. Reference Boggan and Navar-Boggan24,Reference Mantadakis, Tsalkidis and Panopoulou25

Notably, the BMT unit used more piperacillin-tazobactam monotherapy, an evidence-based strategy, compared to any of the PHO units. Although the risk of infections in allogeneic HSCT patients is higher than in PHO patients and their outcomes tend to be worse, Reference Styczynski, Czyzewski and Wysocki26 a review of randomized trials showed that monotherapy for high-risk febrile neutropenia is an effective strategy. Reference Robinson, Lehrnbecher and Phillips27

The prompt de-escalation and/or discontinuation in cases of negative blood cultures increased in all units but remained low after the intervention. Regarding antibiotic initiation without a clear infectious source or fever and with ANC >500/μL, no significant change was noted after intervention, but this practice was relatively rare to begin with.

The use of antifungals on days 1–4 of fever is contrary to international guidelines, Reference Lehrnbecher, Robinson and Fisher13,Reference Groll, Castagnola and Cesaro28,29 but almost 66% of children treated in units in general hospitals received at least one antifungal compared to ∼25% of patients treated in units in pediatric hospitals. This practice did not change significantly after the intervention. Such early use of antifungals (ie, prior to day 4 of febrile neutropenia) is unjustified. Apart from children with acute myeloid leukemia, refractory, or relapsed acute lymphoblastic leukemia, Burkitt lymphoma, and exposure to high-dose corticosteroids, Reference Alexander, Wade and Hibberd30Reference Fisher, Robinson and Lehrnbecher32 most children with cancer do not require prophylaxis or therapy with antifungal agents. A multicenter randomized controlled trial in Italy showed that empirical antifungal therapy was of no advantage in terms of survival without fever and invasive fungal disease in children who were defined as low risk for systemic fungal disease. Reference Caselli, Cesaro and Ziino33

Our study had several strengths and limitations. This was the first study to prospectively collect data regarding antibiotic use in Greek PHO units. Although one PHO unit did not participate and another did not collect data during the postintervention period, our data are representative of the inpatient antibiotic prescribing practices for children with cancer and HSCT recipients treated in specialized units in Greece. One limitation of the study is that only hospital-wide and not unit-specific antibiotic susceptibility data for bacterial pathogens were available. Hence, we could only speculate about the reasons for the considerably different antibiotic prescribing practices among units. Lower susceptibility rates of microbial pathogens may be the reason for the more aggressive use of antibiotics in general hospitals with PHO units, but this issue needs further research. Finally, we were unable to separate all-cause from infectious mortality.

In conclusion, we used surveillance data to describe prescribing practices in Greek PHO and BMT units. We implemented a simple intervention that was associated with improved prescribing practices. We also identified areas necessitating improvement. As a next step, an active intervention with designated antibiotic stewardship physicians and prospective audit-and-feedback recommendations at each Greek PHO unit is needed.

Acknowledgments

Financial support

This research was part of a program that was funded by a grant from the Stavros Niarchos Foundation (SNF). SNF was not involved in the study design, the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data, in the writing of the report, or in the decision to submit the article for publication.

Conflicts of interest

No author has any relevant conflicts of interest to declare related to this article.

Supplementary material

To view supplementary material for this article, please visit https://doi.org/10.1017/ash.2022.43

References

Bio, LL, Kruger, JF, Lee, BP, et al. Predictors of antimicrobial stewardship program recommendation disagreement. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2018;39:806813.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Abbo, LM, Ariza-Heredia, EJ. Antimicrobial stewardship in immunocompromised hosts. Infect Dis Clin N Am 2014;28:263279.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lehrnbecher, T, Phillips, R, Alexander, S, et al. Guideline for the management of fever and neutropenia in children with cancer and/or undergoing hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation. J Clin Oncol 2012;30:44274438.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schmidt-Hieber, M, Teschner, D, Maschmeyer, G, et al. Management of febrile neutropenia in the perspective of antimicrobial de-escalation and discontinuation. Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther 2019;17:983995.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gyssens, IC, Kern, WV, Livermore, DM. ECIL-4, a joint venture of EBMT, EORTC, ICHS and ESGICH of ESCMID. The role of antibiotic stewardship in limiting antibacterial resistance among hematology patients. Haematologica 2013;98:18211825.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dommett, R, Geary, J, Freeman, S, et al. Successful introduction and audit of a step-down oral antibiotic strategy for low risk paediatric febrile neutropaenia in a UK, multicentre, shared-care setting. Eur J Cancer 2009;45:28432849.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paskovaty, A, Pastores, SM, Gedrimaite, ZK, et al. Antimicrobial de-escalation in septic cancer patients: is it safe to back down? Intensive Care Med 2015;41:20222023.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gustinetti, G, Raiola, AM, Varaldo, R, et al. De-escalation and discontinuation of empirical antibiotic treatment in a cohort of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation recipients during the pre-engraftment period. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2018;24:17211726.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scheler, M, Lehrnbecher, T, Groll, AH, et al. Management of children with fever and neutropenia: results of a survey in 51 pediatric cancer centers in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland. Infection 2020;48:607618.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pillinger, KE, Bouchard, J, Withers, ST, et al. Inpatient antibiotic stewardship interventions in the adult oncology and hematopoietic stem cell transplant population: a review of the literature. Ann Pharmacother 2020;54:594610.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Aguilar-Guisado, M, Espigado, I, Martín-Peña, A, et al. Optimisation of empirical antimicrobial therapy in patients with haematological malignancies and febrile neutropenia (How Long study): an open-label, randomised, controlled phase 4 trial. Lancet Haematol 2017;4:e573e583.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Karagiannidou, S, Triantafyllou, C, Zaoutis, TE, et al. Length of stay, cost, and mortality of healthcare-acquired bloodstream infections in children and neonates: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2020;41:342354.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lehrnbecher, T, Robinson, P, Fisher, B, et al. Guideline for the management of fever and neutropenia in children with cancer and hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation recipients: 2017 update. J Clin Oncol 2017;35:20822094.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vicente, M, Al-Nahedh, M, Parsad, S, et al. Impact of a clinical pathway on appropriate empiric vancomycin use in cancer patients with febrile neutropenia. J Oncol Pharm Pract 2017;23:575581.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wattier, RL, Levy, ER, Sabnis, AJ, et al. Reducing second gram-negative antibiotic therapy on pediatric oncology and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation services. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2017;38:10391047.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tomiak, AT, Yau, JC, Huan, SD, et al. Duration of intravenous antibiotics for patients with neutropenic fever. Ann Oncol 1994;5:441445.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Freifeld, AG, Bow, EJ, Sepkowitz, KA, et al. Infectious Diseases Society of America Clinical practice guideline for the use of antimicrobial agents in neutropenic patients with cancer: 2010 update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis 2011;52(4):e56e93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morris, AM. Antimicrobial stewardship programs: appropriate measures and metrics to study their impact. Curr Treat Options Infect Dis 2014;6:101112.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dalton, BR, MacTavish, SJ, Bresee, LC, et al. Antimicrobial use over a four-year period using days of therapy measurement at a Canadian pediatric acute-care hospital. Can J Infect Dis Med Microbiol 2015;26:253258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feretzakis, G, Loupelis, E, Sakagianni, A, et al. A 2-year single-centre audit on antibiotic resistance of Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Acinetobacter baumannii, and Klebsiella pneumoniae strains from an intensive care unit and other wards in a general public hospital in Greece. Antibiotics 2019;8:62.Google Scholar
Maraki, S, Mantadakis, E, Nioti, E, et al. Susceptibility of 2,252 Pseudomonas aeruginosa clinical isolates over 4 years to 9 antimicrobials in a tertiary Greek hospital. Chemotherapy 2014;60:334341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dellit, TH, Owens, RC, McGowan, JE, et al. Infectious Diseases Society of America and the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America guidelines for developing an institutional program to enhance antimicrobial stewardship. Clin Infect Dis 2007;44:159177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baugh, CW, Wang, TJ, Caterino, JM, et al. Emergency department management of patients with febrile neutropenia: guideline concordant or overly aggressive? Acad Emerg Med 2017;24:8391.Google ScholarPubMed
Boggan, JC, Navar-Boggan, AM, et al. Pediatric-specific antimicrobial susceptibility data and empiric antibiotic selection. Pediatrics 2012;130(3):e615e622.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mantadakis, E, Tsalkidis, A, Panopoulou, M, et al. Antimicrobial susceptibility of pediatric uropathogens in Thrace, Greece. Int Urol Nephrol 2011;43:549555.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Styczynski, J, Czyzewski, K, Wysocki, M, et al. Increased risk of infections and infection-related mortality in children undergoing haematopoietic stem cell transplantation compared to conventional anticancer therapy: a multicentre nationwide study. Clin Micrbiol Infect 2016;22:179.e1179.e10.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Robinson, PD, Lehrnbecher, T, Phillips, R, et al. Strategies for empiric management of pediatric fever and neutropenia in patients with cancer and hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation recipients: a systematic review of randomized trials. J Clin Oncol 2016;34:20542060.Google ScholarPubMed
Groll, AH, Castagnola, E, Cesaro, S, et al. Fourth European Conference on Infections in Leukaemia (ECIL-4): guidelines for diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of invasive fungal diseases in paediatric patients with cancer or allogeneic haemopoietic stem-cell transplantation. Lancet Oncol 2014;15:e327e340.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2020 Exceptional Surveillance of Neutropenic Sepsis: Prevention and Management in People with Cancer (NICE guideline CG151). London: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (UK); 2020.Google Scholar
Alexander, SW, Wade, KC, Hibberd, PL, et al. Evaluation of risk prediction criteria for episodes of febrile neutropenia in children with cancer. J Pediatr Hematol Oncol 2002;24:3842.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Castagnola, E, Caviglia, I, Pistorio, A, et al. Bloodstream infections and invasive mycoses in children undergoing acute leukaemia treatment: a 13-year experience at a single Italian institution. Eur J Cancer 2005;41:14391445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fisher, BT, Robinson, PD, Lehrnbecher, T, et al. Risk factors for invasive fungal disease in pediatric cancer and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: a systematic review. J Pediatric Infect Dis Soc 2018;7:191198.Google ScholarPubMed
Caselli, D, Cesaro, S, Ziino, O, et al. A prospective, randomized study of empirical antifungal therapy for the treatment of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia in children. Br J Haematol 2012;158:249255.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Time frame and goals of the Preventing Hospital Infections in Greece (PHIG) intervention in 5 Greek pediatric hematology–oncology (PHO) units and 1 bone marrow transplant (BMT) unit.

Figure 1

Table 1. Demographic and clinical characteristics of cases hospitalized in the six participating PHO units.

Figure 2

Table 2. Use of antibiotics before (PRE) and after (POST) PHIG intervention. Unit 4 did not participate in data collection after intervention.

Figure 3

Table 3. Administration of ≥ 4 antibiotics simultaneously, use of antibiotics with overlapping activity for ≥2 days, start of empirical therapy without obtaining cultures and antibiotic initiation without clear source or fever and with ANC>500/μl before and after PHIG intervention.

Supplementary material: File

Mantadakis et al. supplementary material

Mantadakis et al. supplementary material 1

Download Mantadakis et al. supplementary material(File)
File 17 KB
Supplementary material: File

Mantadakis et al. supplementary material

Mantadakis et al. supplementary material 2

Download Mantadakis et al. supplementary material(File)
File 17 KB
You have Access Open access

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

A national study of antibiotic use in Greek pediatric hematology oncology and bone marrow transplant units
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

A national study of antibiotic use in Greek pediatric hematology oncology and bone marrow transplant units
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

A national study of antibiotic use in Greek pediatric hematology oncology and bone marrow transplant units
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *