Monitoring of antibiotic use in a primary and a tertiary care hospital

Abstract 

Prophylactic and curative use of antibiotics was studied prospectively in 87 consecutive medical and surgical cases of a tertiary care hospital and in 98 cases of a primary care hospital.

Based on Kunins' criteria, antibiotic prophylaxis was found to be more inappropriate in the primary care hospital (49%) than in the tertiary care hospital (34%). Antibiotic therapy, however, was more appropriate at the primary level; 67% as opposed to 60% at the tertiary level. This resulted in a similar overall level of inappropriate antibiotic use in the two hospitals. Surgical prophylaxis was started postoperatively in 68% of the primary care hospital cases. Though prophylaxis was always perioperative in the tertiary care hospital, the postoperative duration was more than 7 days in one third of cases. The nosocomial infection rate in those given prolonged prophylaxis was higher than those who received antibiotics for less than 72 hours. Antibiotics were started empirically in 78% of tertiary hospital care cases and 100% of cases in the primary hospital. Though culture sensitivity was done in 80% of the tertiary care cases, more than half the specimens were sent after multiple doses of antibiotics were started.

The choice of antibiotic did not always correlate with the sensitivity report. Though cost-effective drugs were chosen in 50% of cases, in more than 20% of cases expensive drugs were started.

The study highlights the need for an antibiotic audit and suggests the necessity of having an ongoing peer audit.

Keywords:  Antibiotic audit, primary care, tertiary care centre

No full text is available. To read the body of this article, please view the PDF online.