Key result
Surgical antibiotic prophylaxis compliance remains poor, with only ~70% receiving appropriate preoperative doses.
Why the study?
Compliance with international and local antibiotic prophylaxis guidelines in caesarean deliveries and its health and economic consequences were not well evaluated.
Observational (n=814)
No
Compliance with surgical antibiotic prophylaxis guidelines in caesarean deliveries was poor, leading to unnecessary medication expenditure and highlighting the need for institutional protocols.
Suboptimal prophylaxis compliance raises costs without clear SSI reduction; leaves open whether implementation strategies improve outcomes in similar settings.
Background Preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis is essential for preventing surgical site infection (SSI). The aim of this study was to evaluate compliance with international and local recommendations in caesarean deliveries carried out at the Obstetrics and Gynaecology Service of the Ambato General Hospital, as well as any related health and economic consequences. Methods A retrospective indication-prescription drug utilization study was conducted using data from caesarean deliveries occurred in 2018. A clinical pharmacist assessed guidelines compliance based on the following criteria: administration of antibiotic prophylaxis, antibiotic selection, dose, time of administration and duration. The relationship between the frequency of SSI and other variables, including guideline compliance, was analysed. The cost associated with the antibiotic used was compared with the theoretical cost considering total compliance with recommendations. Descriptive statistics, Odds Ratio and Pearson Chi Square were used for data analysis by IBM SPSS Statistics version 25. Results The study included 814 patients with an average age of 30.87 ± 5.50 years old. Among the caesarean sections, 68.67% were emergency interventions; 3.44% lasted longer than four hours and in 0.25% of the deliveries blood loss was greater than 1.5 L. Only 69.90% of patients received preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis; however, 100% received postoperative antibiotic treatment despite disagreement with guideline recommendations (duration: 6.75 ± 1.39 days). The use of antibiotic prophylaxis was more frequent in scheduled than in emergency caesarean sections (OR=2.79, P=0.000). Nevertheless, the timing of administration, antibiotic selection and dose were more closely adhered to guideline recommendations. The incidence of surgical site infection was 1.35%, but tended to increase in patients who had not received preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis (OR=1.33, P=0.649). Also, a significant relationship was found between SSI and patient age (Chisq=8.08, P=0.036). The mean expenditure on antibiotics per patient was 5.7 times greater than that the cost derived from compliance with international recommendations. Conclusions Surgical antibiotic prophylaxis compliance was far below guideline recommendations, especially with respect to implementation and duration. This not only poses a risk to patients but leads to unnecessary expenditure on medicines. Therefore, this justifies the need for educational interventions and the implementation of institutional protocols involving pharmacists.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Viamonte et al. (2020) conducted an observational in Caesarean delivery (n=814). Clinical practice guidelines for antibiotic prophylaxis vs. Non-compliance was evaluated on Compliance with preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis administration. Compliance with surgical antibiotic prophylaxis guidelines was poor, with only 69.9% receiving preoperative prophylaxis and 100% receiving inappropriate postoperative antibiotics.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: