Context: Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs (ASPs) are crucial to optimizing antibiotic use. ASPs are implemented in the Veterans Health Administration (VAs), but they do not target the needs of populations at high risk for resistant infections, such as spinal cord injury and disorder (SCI/D).
Objective: The goal of this study was to assess key ASP leader and SCI/D clinicians' perceived level of implementation and impact of 33 Antimicrobial Stewardship (AS) strategies.
Method: SCI/D clinicians and ASP leaders across 24 VA facilities with SCI/D units were surveyed. Participants rated their perceived level of impact ("high", "mild", "low") and perceived level of implementation ("not", "partially", "fully") for 33 AS strategies in SCI/D units in VAs. Strategies were grouped into core elements which they support. We conducted a Fisher's exact test to assess differences between respondent perceptions based on role (SCI/D clinicians versus ASP leaders).
Results: AS strategy implementation varied across VA facilities. Of the AS strategies, pre-authorization was perceived to be highly impactful (78%) and fully implemented (82%). SCI/D clinicians and ASP leaders rated AS strategies differently such that SCI/D clinicians were less aware of implementation of AS strategies related to reporting requirements; further, SCI/D clinicians rated strategies which guide treatment duration and which limit C. difficile antibiotic exposure as more impactful than ASP leaders. Ratings for facility-wide and SCI/D unit ratings did not significantly differ for impact or implementation.
Conclusion: Implementation practices varied across VA facilities. Future work should implement highly impactful AS strategies according to facility and unit needs.
Keywords: Antibiotic; Antimicrobial stewardship; Implementation; Infectious disease; Spinal cord injuries and disorders.