An international inventory of antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) training programmes for AMS teams. (19th March 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Weier, Naomi; Nathwani, Dilip; Thursky, Karin; Tängdén, Thomas; Vlahović-Palčevski, Vera; Dyar, Oliver; Beović, Bojana; Levy Hara, Gabriel; Patel, Rahul; Pulcini, Céline; Zaidi, Syed Tabish R
• Is Part Of: Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy. Volume 76:Number 6(2021)
• Page Start: 1633
• Page End: 1640
• Publication Date: 2021-03-19
• Subjects: Anti-infective agents -- Periodicals; Chemotherapy -- Periodicals; 615.58
• DOI: 10.1093/jac/dkab053
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0305-7453

Abstract

Abstract: Background: Healthcare professionals are increasingly expected to lead antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) initiatives. This role in complex healthcare environments requires specialized training. Objectives: Little is known about the types of AMS training programmes available to clinicians seeking to play a lead role in AMS. We aimed to identify clinicians' awareness of AMS training programmes, characteristics of AMS training programmes available and potential barriers to participation. Methods: AMS training programmes available were identified by members of the ESCMID Study Group for Antimicrobial Stewardship (ESGAP) via an online survey and through an online search in 2018. Individual training programme course coordinators were then contacted (September–October 2018) for data on the target audience(s), methods of delivery, intended outcomes and potential barriers to accessing the training programme. Results: A total of 166/250 ESGAP members (66%) responded to the survey, nominating 48 unique AMS training programmes. An additional 32 training programmes were identified through an online search. AMS training programmes were from around the world. Less than half (44.4%) of respondents were aware of one or more AMS training programmes available, with pharmacists more aware compared with medical doctors and other professionals (73% versus 46% and 25%, respectively). AMS training programmes were most commonly delivered online (59%) and aimed at medical doctors (46%). Training costs and a lack of recognition by health professional societies were the most frequently cited barriers to participation in AMS training programmes. Conclusions: The development of a systematic inventory of AMS training programmes around the globe identifies opportunities and limitations to current training available. Improving access and increasing awareness amongst target participants will support improved education in AMS.