ABSTRACT
Objectives To determine the extent to which variation in hospital antibiotic prescribing is associated with mortality risk in acute/general medicine inpatients.
Design Ecological analysis, using electronic health records from Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) and antibiotic data from IQVIA.
Setting 135 acute National Health Service (NHS) hospital Trusts in England.
Participants 36,124,372 acute/general medicine inpatients (16 years old at admission) admitted between 01/April/2010-31/March/2017 (median age 66 years, 50.4% female, 83.8% white ethnicity).
Main outcome measures Random-effects meta-regression was used to investigate whether heterogeneity in the adjusted probability of death within 30-days of admission was associated with hospital-level antibiotic use, measured in defined-daily-doses (DDD)/1,000 bed-days. Models also considered DDDs/1,000 admissions and DDDs for selected antibiotics, including narrow-spectrum/broad-spectrum, inpatient/outpatient, parenteral/oral, piperacillin-tazobactam and meropenem, and Public Health England interpretations of World Health Organization Access, Watch, and Reserve antibiotics. Secondary analyses examined 14-day mortality and non-elective re-admission to hospital within 30-days of discharge.
Results There was a 15-fold variation in hospital-level DDDs/1,000 bed-days and comparable or greater variation in broad-spectrum, parenteral, and Reserve antibiotic use. After adjusting for a wide range of admission factors to reflect varying case-mix across hospitals, the adjusted probability of 30-day mortality changed by -0.010% (95% CI: -0.064 to +0.044) for each increase in hospital-level antibiotic use of 500 DDDs/1,000 bed-days. Analyses focusing on other metrics of antibiotic use, sub-populations, and 14-day mortality also showed no consistent association with the adjusted probability of death.
Discussion We find no evidence that the wide variation in antibiotic use across NHS hospitals is associated with case-mix adjusted mortality risk in acute/general medicine inpatients. Our results indicate that hospital antibiotic use in the acute/general medicine population could be safely cut by up to one-third.
What is already known on this topic
What is already known on this topic
Previous studies have reported wide variation in both recommended antibiotic prescribing duration and total antibiotic consumption among acute hospitals.
In hospitals with more acute patients, systematic under-treatment might reasonably be expected to harm patients, and though a growing body of evidence shows reducing hospital antibiotic overuse may be done safely, there is a lack of good data to indicate how much it may be possible to safely reduce use
Examination of the possibility that substantially driving down antibiotic use could compromise clinical outcomes is needed to reassure practitioners and the public that substantially reducing antibiotic use is safe.
What this study adds
What this study adds
After adjusting for a wide range of admission factors to reflect varying case-mix across acute hospitals, we observed no consistent association between 24 metrics of hospital-level antibiotic use and the adjusted probability of death in a large national cohort of over 36 million acute/general medicine inpatients
These findings indicate that at many hospitals patients are receiving considerably more antibiotics than necessary to treat their acute infections, and we estimate system-wide reductions of up to one-third of antibiotic defined-daily-doses (DDDs) could be achieved safely among medical admissions.
The magnitude of the antibiotic reductions that could be safely achieved dwarf the 1% year-on-year reductions required of NHS hospitals.
Competing Interest Statement
All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at www.icmje.org/coi_disclosure.pdf: EPB declares a grant from Antibiotic Research UK (ANTRUK) during the conduct of the study (grant number ANTSRG 02/2018). ASW reports grants from National Institutes of Health Research, UK, during the conduct of the study. TEAP reports grants from Wellcome Trust, the Medical Research Council, BBRC, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and NIHR, outside the submitted work. All authors declare no financial relationships with any organisations that might have an interest in the submitted work in the previous three years; all authors declare no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work.
Funding Statement
This work was supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) under its Programme Grants for Applied Research Programme (Reference Number RP-PG-0514-20015), and by Antibiotic Research UK (ANTRUK) grant number ANTSRG 02/2018. ASW is supported by the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, Oxford. ASW and TEAP are NIHR Senior Investigators. The views expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of ANTRUK, the NHS, the NIHR, or the Department of Health. The funders had no role in the study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation of results, writing of the manuscript, or the decision to publish.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This study is an analysis of de-identified routine electronic health record data obtained through the NHS Digital Data Access Request Service (DARS). The original study protocol was approved by the Health and Social Care Information Centre (HSCIC; now NHS Digital) on 8 June 2016. At that time, guidance provided by NHS Digital, the Medical Research Council (MRC), and the NHS Health Research Authority (HRA) advised that the use of non-identifiable data from NHS Digital did not require HRA Research Ethics Committee (REC) review. In line with this guidance, REC review and university ethics review were not obtained. HES data for the project was finally received in January 2018. The hospital-level antibiotic data used in this study was obtained from IQVIA (via Public Health England) in January 2020 and contains no patient-level information.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
A copy of the Health Episode Statistics (HES) Admitted Patient Care dataset used in this study can be requested from NHS Digital via their Data Access Request Service (DARS) by using the same inclusion criteria and admission dates described in this study. NHS Digital can also be asked (via DARS) to link the requested HES data with death information from the Office of National Statistics (ONS). Antibiotic consumption data by NHS Trust can be requested from IQVIA Solutions UK Limited and its affiliates. Copyright: IQVIA Solutions UK Limited and its affiliates. All rights reserved. Use for sales, marketing or any other commercial purposes is not permitted without express prior written consent from IQVIA Solutions UK Limited.
