41 / 150
Method(s):
Qualitative, semi-structured in-depth telephone and face-
to-face interviews were undertaken with a purposive sample of
community pharmacy team members, including pharmacists and
dispensers. An interview schedule, was developed, validated and
piloted. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim.
Data were analysed thematically using the Framework Approach.
Results:
Twenty seven employees consented and were interviewed.
Twenty participants were pharmacists with nineteen employees
working mainly in a large chain across five regions, 14 had been in
practise for up to five years. Most interviewees thought that the
pharmacy was an ideal place to engage patients in an antimicrobial
stewardship initiative with a need for a multi pronged approach.
Although the tool was perceived to be useful, fewwere aware it existed
or had any experience in using this. A lack of training around
antimicrobial stewardship was also identified.
Discussion and/or Conclusion(s):
It is recommended that EAAD tools
and other materials need to be more effectively disseminated and
pharmacists require more opportunities for specialised training on
antimicrobial stewardship.
ID: 4683
The role of the community pharmacist in delivering the 5-year
antimicrobial resistance strategy
Gill Hawksworth
1
, Phil Howard
2
, Jake Mills
1
, Bahareh Yazdani
1
,
Sophie Devine
1
, Emily Clifford
1
.
1
University of Huddersfield,
2
Leeds
Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds
Background:
This study analyses approaches community pharmacies
are currently undertaking to adhere to the Department of Health
antimicrobial resistance strategy 2013.
Aim(s)/Objective(s):
To determine the delivery by community phar-
macists of the antimicrobial resistance strategy, pharmacist
’
s views on
challenging GP
’
s about antibiotic prescribing and point of care testing
for early detection of infections.
Method(s):
This study required and received ethics approval.
Following consent, a questionnaire was sent out in January 2016 to
participating community pharmacists across Calderdale and Kirklees.
Results:
Of the 50 questionnaires received, 28 pharmacists (56%)
were aware of their local antibiotic guidelines and 38 (76%) did not
monitor local antibiotic prescribing from their GPs, whereas 15 (30%)
never ask patients what an antibiotic is for. Qualitative data from the
study showed pharmacists thought this question too sensitive but
would discuss if written on a prescription for antibiotics. Only 23 (46%)
pharmacists always check for allergies, 32 (64%) explained the dose, 31
(62%) explained about completing the course, 26 (52%) explained
about the avoidance of sharing antibiotics and there is support from 37
(74%) for point of care testing, 45 (90%) for expansion of a vaccination
programme and 38 (76%) for more emphasis on hand washing.
Discussion and/or Conclusion(s):
Potential practice improvements
by community pharmacists include the indication on an antibiotic
prescription, a checklist including allergies of patients, counselling
(avoiding sharing), general hygiene and patient self-help guides. The
study also suggests diagnostic services are something community
pharmacists would develop which may show further implementation
of the 5-year antimicrobial strategy.
ID: 4685
Patient
’
s views of community pharmacists delivering the 5-year
antimicrobial resistance strategy
Gill Hawksworth
1
, Phil Howard
2
, Jake Mills
1
, Bahareh Yazdani
1
,
Sophie Devine
1
, Emily Clifford
1
.
1
University of Huddersfield,
2
Leeds
Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds
Background:
This study analyses patient
’
s views on the effectiveness
of community pharmacists delivering the 5-year antimicrobial
resistance strategy.
Aim(s)/Objective(s):
To determine views of specific members of the
public about having the indication for their antibiotic on prescription.
To establish patients
’
views on antimicrobial resistance, importance of
adherence and use of left over antibiotics. To investigate patient views
on trust in healthcare professionals giving advice on antibiotics and
views on NHS
‘
treating your infection
’
leaflets.
Method(s):
This study received ethical approval. Consent from 10
pharmacies allowed data to be collected from patients obtaining a
prescription for antibiotics in January 2016. Patients received a
questionnaire, a participant information leaflet and NHS
‘
treating
your infection
’
leaflet.
Results:
Of the 121 questionnaires, 83 patients (69%) saw community
pharmacists before their GP for cold/flu, 90 (74%) stopped antibiotics
before completing the course, 20/90 (30%) felt better, 16/90 (7%) had
side effects, 48 (40%) flushed leftovers down the toilet.
One hundred (83%) patients supported their indication on their
prescription but for eg. HIV, chlamydia, 18 (18%) changed their mind
with 91 (75%) saying they knew about antimicrobial resistance via the
media, however 81 patients (67%) didn
′
t trust this source. The NHS
self-help guide was favoured by 92 (76%) and 104 (86%) supported
community pharmacy access to their record.
Discussion and/or Conclusion(s):
A check list of community phar-
macy antibiotic counselling points would improve adherence to the
5-year antimicrobial strategy, ensuring relevant information is from
trusted sources. The indication on antibiotic prescriptions at the
patient
’
s discretion, would help to improve antibiotic monitoring and
counselling.
ID: 4698
First birthday; Review of the Queen Elizabeth University Hospital,
Glasgow
’
s Infection Consult Service
Fiona Robb
1
, Lee Stewart
1
, Alisdair MacConnachie
1
, Erica Peters
1
,
Beth White
1
, John Yates
1
, Ray Fox
1
, Thomas Evans
1
, Andrew Seaton
1
.
1
NHS Greater Glasgow & Clyde
Background:
In June 2015 following secondary care reorganisation in
NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde (NHSGGC), the infection consult
service previously provided on four separate hospital sites amalga-
mated and moved to the new 1400 bed Queen Elizabeth University
Hospital.
Aim(s)/Objective(s):
These consults offer ward-based infection
education, promote prudent antimicrobial prescribing and support
clinical colleagues optimise infection investigation and management.
They support the wider antimicrobial stewardship agenda in NHSGGC,
which combines persuasive and restrictive strategies to promote safe,
effective and prudent antimicrobial use.
Method(s):
The service comprises ward rounds undertaken jointly by
an infectious diseases consultant and an antimicrobial pharmacist,
supported by enhanced communicationwith laboratory-based clinical
microbiology. Referrals are received pre-consult (by telephone/page/
email) or ad-hoc directly from clinical teams during the rounds.
Referrals include patients;
•
prescribed (e.g.
meropenem,
piperacillin-tazobactam,
co-
amoxiclav)
•
prescribed potential high risk agents (e.g. aminoglycosides,
linezolid)
•
where diagnostic uncertainty exists
•
identified through microbiology e.g. Bacteraemia or
Clostridium
difficile
infection.
Results:
Data were collected from 150 consult ward rounds over 12
months, 1155 patient reviews were recorded; 707 new referrals/448
return visits. Interventions included;
•
Clinical review and advice on investigation with no therapy
change; 501 (43.4%)
•
IVOST to oral therapy; 170 (14.7%)
•
rationalised therapy +/
−
IVOST; 162 (14.0%)
•
de-escalate therapy; 106 (9.2%)
•
escalate therapy; 103 (8.9%)
•
stop therapy; 83 (7.2%)
•
transfer OPAT/ID ward; 30 (2.6%)
Abstracts of FIS/HIS 2016
–
Poster Presentations / Journal of Hospital Infection 94S1 (2016) S24
–
S134
S36