3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Gaps and barriers in the implementation and functioning of antimicrobial stewardship programmes: results from an educational and behavioural mixed methods needs assessment in France, the United States, Mexico and India

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Evidence shows limited adherence to antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) principles.

          Objectives

          To identify educational gaps and systemic barriers obstructing adherence to AMS principles.

          Methods

          A mixed-methods study combining a thematic analysis of qualitative interviews (January–February 2021) and inferential analysis of quantitative surveys (May–June 2021) was conducted. Participants from France, the USA, Mexico and India were purposively sampled from online panels of healthcare professionals to include infectious disease physicians, infection control specialists, clinical microbiologists, pharmacologists or pharmacists expected to apply AMS principles in their practice setting (e.g. clinic, academic-affiliated or community-based hospital). A gap analysis framework guided this study.

          Results

          The final sample included 383 participants ( n = 33 interviews; n = 350 surveys). Mixed-methods findings indicated suboptimal knowledge and skills amongst participants to facilitate personal and collective application of AMS principles. Survey data indicated a gap in ideal versus current knowledge of AMS protocols, especially amongst pharmacologists (Δ0.95/4.00, P < 0.001). Gaps in ideal versus current skill levels were also measured and were highest amongst infectious control specialists (Δ1.15/4.00, P < 0.001), for convincing hospital executives to allocate resources to AMS programmes. Already existing systemic barriers (e.g. insufficient dedicated time/funding/training) were perceived as being aggravated during the COVID-19 pandemic (72% of survey participants agreed). Reported gaps were highest in India and France.

          Conclusions

          The educational needs of professionals and countries included in this study can inform future continuous professional development activities in AMS. Additional funding should be considered to address perceived systemic barriers. Local assessments are warranted to validate results and suitability of interventions.

          Related collections

          Most cited references37

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Thematic Analysis

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Comparison of Convenience Sampling and Purposive Sampling

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Best Practices for Developing and Validating Scales for Health, Social, and Behavioral Research: A Primer

              Scale development and validation are critical to much of the work in the health, social, and behavioral sciences. However, the constellation of techniques required for scale development and evaluation can be onerous, jargon-filled, unfamiliar, and resource-intensive. Further, it is often not a part of graduate training. Therefore, our goal was to concisely review the process of scale development in as straightforward a manner as possible, both to facilitate the development of new, valid, and reliable scales, and to help improve existing ones. To do this, we have created a primer for best practices for scale development in measuring complex phenomena. This is not a systematic review, but rather the amalgamation of technical literature and lessons learned from our experiences spent creating or adapting a number of scales over the past several decades. We identified three phases that span nine steps. In the first phase, items are generated and the validity of their content is assessed. In the second phase, the scale is constructed. Steps in scale construction include pre-testing the questions, administering the survey, reducing the number of items, and understanding how many factors the scale captures. In the third phase, scale evaluation, the number of dimensions is tested, reliability is tested, and validity is assessed. We have also added examples of best practices to each step. In sum, this primer will equip both scientists and practitioners to understand the ontology and methodology of scale development and validation, thereby facilitating the advancement of our understanding of a range of health, social, and behavioral outcomes.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                JAC Antimicrob Resist
                JAC Antimicrob Resist
                jacamr
                JAC-Antimicrobial Resistance
                Oxford University Press (US )
                2632-1823
                October 2022
                30 September 2022
                30 September 2022
                : 4
                : 5
                : dlac094
                Affiliations
                AXDEV Group Inc. , Brossard, Quebec, Canada
                AXDEV Group Inc. , Brossard, Quebec, Canada
                The Ohio State University, College of Pharmacy , Columbus, OH, USA
                Thammasat University, Faculty of Medicine , Pratumthani, Thailand
                Resistencia Antimicrobiana y Epidemiología Hospitalaria (RAEH), Universidad El Bosque , Bogotá, Colombia
                AXDEV Group Inc. , Brossard, Quebec, Canada
                Author notes
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9278-1718
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2825-5497
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7686-0670
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2404-1507
                Article
                dlac094
                10.1093/jacamr/dlac094
                9524477
                e82f4b2f-ea37-4ba3-baaa-c4974d98487a
                © The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com

                History
                : 05 May 2022
                : 19 August 2022
                Page count
                Pages: 10
                Funding
                Funded by: bioMérieux, doi 10.13039/501100022110;
                Funded by: AXDEV Group Inc;
                Categories
                Original Article
                AcademicSubjects/MED00740
                AcademicSubjects/SCI01150

                Comments

                Comment on this article