Antibiotics in elective colon surgery. A randomized trial of oral, systemic, and oral/systemic antibiotics for prophylaxis. Oral versus systemic antibiotic prophylaxis in elective colon surgery: a randomized study and meta-analysis send a message from the 1990s. Comparison between oral and systemic antibiotics and their combined use for the prevention of complications in colorectal surgery. Failure of topically applied antibiotics, added to systemic prophylaxis, to reduce perineal wound infection in abdominoperineal excision of the rectum. Effectiveness of a multiple intervention to reduce antibiotic prescribing for respiratory tract symptoms in primary care: randomised controlled trial. An evaluation of statewide strategies to reduce antibiotic overuse. Comparison of two prophylactic single-dose intravenous antibiotic regimes in the treatment of patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery in a district general hospital. Pharmacy-implemented guidelines on switching from intravenous to oral antibiotics: an intervention study. Antibiotic prophylaxis in third molar surgery.
A prospective, randomized double-blind study was undertaken to compare the efficacy of three prophylactic regimens (oral neomycin and erythromycin, intravenous cefoxitin, and a combination of both oral and intravenous antibiotics) in patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery. One hundred sixty-nine patients were randomized and 146 patients were evaluable. Septic complications occurred in 11.4 per cent of patients receiving oral antibiotics only, in 11.7 per cent of patients receiving intravenous cefoxitin alone, and in 7.8 per cent of patients receiving both oral and intravenous antibiotics. These differences were not statistically different. The greatest number of septic complications occurred in those patients with anastomotic disruptions. Two patients died (1.3%), both of whom had major anastomotic failures. There was no advantage between any of the groups in the incidence of wound infection (3.9-6.8%). Thus, no advantage could be identified in this study in the combination of oral and intravenous antibiotics in elective colorectal surgery. To compare the efficacy of combined oral and systemic antibiotics (combined) versus systemic antibiotics (systemic) alone in preventing surgical site infection in elective surgery of the colon, and to perform a meta-analysis of randomized studies comparing combined versus systemic antibiotics in elective colon surgery.
                A double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial.
                The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Montreal, a university-affiliated community hospital.
                Two hundred and fifteen patients scheduled to undergo elective surgery of the colon.
                Patients were randomized to receive neomycin and metronidazole orally (109 patients) or identical placebos (106 patients) on the final preoperative day. All were given amikacin and metronidazole intravenously just before operation. Thirteen randomized series comparing combined and systemic antibiotic prophylaxis in elective colon surgery were identified for meta-analysis.
                Rates of postoperative surgical site infections: risk differences, risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs); organisms found in the colon and wound fat at surgery, and in infected wounds.
                Three patients in the systemic group, and 5 in the combined group were excluded. Wound infections occurred in 5 patients in the combined group but in 17 in the systemic group (p < 0.01, RR = 0.29, 95% CI 0.11-0.75). Bacteria isolated from wound infections and wound fat were similar to those found in the colon. They were more frequent in the colon in the systemic group (p < 0.001) and occurred in wound fat in the systemic group twice as often as in the combined group (p < 0.001). By stepwise logistic regression, the presence of bacteria in wound fat at surgery was the strongest predictor of postoperative wound infection (p < 0.002). In the meta-analysis, the summary weighted risk difference in surgical site infections between groups (d(w)) and the summary RR both favoured combined prophylaxis (d(w) = 0.56, 95% CI 0.26-0.86; RR = 0.51, 95% CI 0.24-0.78; p < 0.001).
                In elective surgery of the colon combined oral and systemic antibiotics are superior to systemic antibiotics in preventing surgical site infections. Orally administered antibiotics add value by reducing bacterial loading of the colon and wound fat contamination, both associated with postoperative wound infection. Meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials reported from 1975 to 1995 supports these conclusions. Ninety patients were included in this prospective randomized trial. Each required electric colorectal surgery and was prepared for operation with oral preoperative antibiotic therapy, systemic peroperative therapy, or by a combination of both. The number of each type of septic postoperative complication and their total did not differ between the group treated by oral antibiotics prior to operation and the group treated peroperatively with systemic antibiotic therapy. The total number of septic complications (wall abscesses, fistulas, subdiaphragmatic abscesses, septicemia, peritonitis), however, was significantly less (P less than 0.05) in the group treated by both preoperative oral antibiotics and peroperative systemic antibiotic therapy (3.3 per cent) than in either groups treated only orally preoperatively (30 per cent) or by systemic antibiotic therapy during the operation (23 per cent). The combination of oral antibiotic therapy prior to operation and of systemic peroperative antibiotic therapy, therefore, presents the most effective prophylactic effectiveness. In a prospective, randomized trial, prophylactic use of topical antibiotics in addition to systemic prophylaxis was studied in patients undergoing abdominoperineal amputation of the rectum. All patients received gentamicin 80 mg and metronidazole 500 mg intravenously at induction of anesthesia, followed by the same dose 8 hourly for 48 hours. In accordance with the randomization, half of the patients were additionally given gentamicin 160 mg + metronidazole 400 mg topically into the perineal wound at closure. Perineal wound infection appeared in 19 of the 41 patients who received both systemic and topical prophylaxis, and in 18 of the 38 with only systemic antibiotics. Cell-mediated immunity was preoperatively assessed with a skin test (Multitest) in all but three patients. Impairment of cell-mediated immunity was associated with significantly heightened rate of wound infection, and these patients did not benefit from topical antibiotics. To assess the effectiveness of a multiple intervention aimed at reducing antibiotic prescription rates for symptoms of the respiratory tract in primary care.
                Randomised controlled trial.
                Twelve peer review groups including 100 general practitioners with their collaborating pharmacists in the region of Utrecht, Netherlands.
                The intervention consisted of group education meetings, with a consensus procedure on indication for and type of antibiotics and with training in communication skills; monitoring and feedback on prescribing behaviour; group education for assistants of general practitioners and pharmacists; and education material for patients. The control group did not receive any of these elements.
                Antibiotic prescription rates for acute symptoms of the respiratory tract and patients' satisfaction.
                89 general practitioners completed the study (89%). At baseline, prescription rates for antibiotics for respiratory tract symptoms did not differ between intervention and control group (27% v 29%, respectively). After nine months, the prescription rates in the intervention group fell to 23%, whereas the control group's rose to 37% (mean difference in change -12%, 95% confidence interval -18.9% to -4.0%). Multilevel analysis confirmed the results of the unadjusted analysis (intervention effect -10.7%, -20.3% to -1.0%). Patients' satisfaction was high and did not differ in the two groups at baseline or after the intervention.
                A multiple intervention reduced prescribing rates of antibiotics for respiratory tract symptoms while maintaining a high degree of satisfaction among patients. Further research should focus on the sustainability and cost effectiveness of this intervention. The rapid increase of antibiotic resistance poses a significant threat to human health. Overuse of antibiotics has been linked to rates of antibiotic resistance. This study assessed the utility of two common interventions--1) practice profiling and feedback and 2) patient education materials--implemented to decrease antibiotic prescribing for pediatric upper respiratory infections (URIs).
                Based on Medicaid regions in Kentucky, primary care physicians managing pediatric respiratory infections in Medicaid were randomized into four groups. Groups received either 1) performance feedback only, 2) patient education materials only, 3) both feedback and education materials, or 4) no intervention. Participating physicians had their antibiotic prescribing assessed for the period of July 1, 1996, to November 30, 1997, with an intervention in June 1997. The study included 216 physicians and 124,092 episodes of care.
                All groups increased in proportion of episodes with antibiotics between the pre-intervention and post-intervention periods. Prescribing in the patient education group and the patient education and feedback group increased at a significantly lower rate than in the control group. Physicians did not change their coding of illness to justify antibiotics after the intervention, and there was no significant generalization of effect of the pediatric intervention on prescribing for adult URIs.
                These interventions demonstrate little if any impact on promoting appropriate antibiotic prescribing. Antibiotic prescribing for viral respiratory infections continues to increase, suggesting concomitant increases in antibiotic resistance. Two hundred and twenty-nine patients were entered into a study to compare the effectiveness and safety of two single-shot antibiotic regimes in patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery in two district general hospitals. A single shot of intravenous (IV) latamoxef disodium was as effective as an IV combination of cefuroxime and metronidazole in control of wound infection following elective large bowel surgery when given as a bolus at the time of anaesthetic induction. The incidence of major wound infection was 6% and was evenly distributed in the two treatment groups. Half the major wound infections were associated with faecal fistulae. A single shot of IV antibiotic at the time of anaesthetic induction was safe, simple and an effective prophylaxis against major wound infection. There was a low incidence (1.3%) of serious postoperative bleeding and no serious adverse reactions were noted. The overall mortality was 9%. Death was significantly related to elderly patients, a poor performance status, operative contamination and wound infections. A high proportion of medical in-patients in the UK receive intravenous (IV) antibiotic therapy. This may be inappropriate in non-severe infections, or unnecessarily prolonged.
                To assess the impact of guideline implementation on IV antibiotic prescribing in medical admissions to a general hospital.
                Observational intervention study.
                Data relating to infection and antibiotic therapy were collected for 4 weeks pre-intervention (group 1) and 4 weeks post intervention (group 2). Six months later, data were collected for a further 4 weeks following a second intervention (group 3). Interventions consisted of pharmacy-led implementation of guidelines incorporating criteria for IV therapy and switching to the oral route. The second intervention also included pharmacy-initiated feedback on prescribing. The main outcome measures were IV antibiotic duration, and appropriateness of the IV route and switching.
                Of 2365 admissions, 757 (32%) had 806 treated episodes. IV therapy was used in 40%, 46% and 36% (groups 1, 2 and 3, respectively) and was appropriate in 92% vs. 100% (group 1 vs. 2). In groups 2 and 3, oral switch timing was appropriate in 90% and 88%, vs. 17% in group 1 (p < 0.001). Between groups 1 and 2, median duration of IV therapy was reduced from 3 to 2 days (p = 0.01). More patients in group 2 received appropriate exclusively IV therapy (65% vs. 96%, p < 0.01). Duration of stay in IV-treated patients reduced from 13 to 10 days in groups 2 and 3 (p = 0.047). IV antibiotic expenditure reduced by 13% per patient admitted between groups 1 and 2.
                Pharmacy-led introduction of antibiotic guidelines appears to result in clinically appropriate reductions in IV therapy. To evaluate the role of prophylactic antibiotics, if any, in the removal of mandibular impacted third molars.
                A total of 89 patients were randomly allocated in 3 groups (group 1, placebo; group 2, amoxicillin 1 g orally 1 h before surgery; and group 3, metronidazole 800 mg orally 1 h before surgery).
                Of the 89 patients, 5 had surgical wound infection (3 [10.33%] in group 1, 2 [6.45%] in group 2, and none [0%] in group 3), leading to an overall infection rate of 5.61%. There was no statistically significant difference found in surgical wound infection between the groups.
                Our study failed to show any advantage in the routine use of prophylactic antibiotics because we found no statistically significant difference between the groups.
The authors of this review have been unable to identify the most effective intervention or to assess the associated risks. Research is urgently needed into the effectiveness of oral versus topical antibiotics in this group of patients. Clinicians considering antibiotic treatment need to balance any potential benefit against the risks of side effects and antibiotic resistance.