Sign in to use this feature.

Years

Between: -

Subjects

remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline

Journals

Article Types

Countries / Regions

Search Results (5)

Search Parameters:
Authors = Pornpan Koomanachai

Order results
Result details
Results per page
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
9 pages, 991 KiB  
Article
Development and Implementation of a Mobile Application for Choosing Empirical Antimicrobial Therapy for Bacteremia, Pneumonia, Urinary Tract Infection, and Skin and Soft Tissue Infection among Hospitalized Patients
by Kanthon Chaloernpoj, Walaiporn Wangchinda, Pornpan Koomanachai, Visanu Thamlikitkul and Pinyo Rattanaumpawan
Antibiotics 2023, 12(1), 113; https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics12010113 - 7 Jan 2023
Viewed by 2292
Abstract
Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and computerized clinical decision support programs are effective antimicrobial stewardship strategies. The DigitalAMS™, a mobile-based application for choosing empirical antimicrobial therapy under the hospital’s CPGs, was implemented at Siriraj Hospital and evaluated. From January to June 2018, a cross-sectional [...] Read more.
Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and computerized clinical decision support programs are effective antimicrobial stewardship strategies. The DigitalAMS™, a mobile-based application for choosing empirical antimicrobial therapy under the hospital’s CPGs, was implemented at Siriraj Hospital and evaluated. From January to June 2018, a cross-sectional study was conducted among 401 hospitalized adults who received ≥1 dose of antimicrobials and had ≥1 documented site-specific infection. The antimicrobial regimen prescribed by the ward physician (WARD regimen), recommended by the DigitalAMS™ (APP regimen), and recommended by two independent infectious disease (ID) physicians before (Emp-ID regimen) and after (Def-ID regimen) the final microbiological results became available were compared in a pairwise fashion. The percent agreement of antimicrobial prescribing between the APP and Emp-ID regimens was 85.7% in the bacteremia group, 59.1% in the pneumonia group, 78.6% in the UTI group, and 85.2% in the SSTI group. The percent agreement between the APP and Emp-ID regimens was significantly higher than that between the WARD and Emp-ID regimens in three site-specific infection groups: the bacteremia group (85.7% vs. 47.9%, p < 0.001), the UTI group (78.6% vs. 37.8%, p < 0.001), and the SSTI group (85.2% vs. 40.2%, p < 0.001). Furthermore, the percent agreement between the APP and Def-ID regimens was similar to that between the Emp-ID and Def-ID regimens in all sites of infection. In conclusions, the implementation of DigitalAMS™ seems useful but needs some revisions. The dissemination of this ready-to-use application with customized clinical practice guidelines to other hospital settings may be beneficial. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Antimicrobial Stewardship and Prescribing Practice)
Show Figures

Figure 1

17 pages, 260 KiB  
Article
Implementation of Clinical Practice Guidelines for Empirical Antibiotic Therapy of Bacteremia, Urinary Tract Infection, and Pneumonia: A Multi-Center Quasi-Experimental Study
by Pornpan Koomanachai, Jintana Srisompong, Sunee Chayangsu, Darat Ruangkriengsin, Visanu Thamlikitkul, Walaiporn Wangchinda, Rujipas Sirijatuphat and Pinyo Rattanaumpawan
Antibiotics 2022, 11(7), 903; https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics11070903 - 6 Jul 2022
Cited by 6 | Viewed by 3109
Abstract
A quasi-experimental study was conducted on the implementation of locally developed clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for empirical antibiotic (ATB) therapy of common infections (bacteremia, urinary tract infection (UTI), pneumonia) in the hospitals from January 2019 to December 2020. The CPGs were developed using [...] Read more.
A quasi-experimental study was conducted on the implementation of locally developed clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for empirical antibiotic (ATB) therapy of common infections (bacteremia, urinary tract infection (UTI), pneumonia) in the hospitals from January 2019 to December 2020. The CPGs were developed using data from patients with these infections at individual hospitals. Relevant CPG data pre- and post-implementation were collected and compared. Of the 1644 patients enrolled in the study, 808 and 836 were in the pre- and post-implementation periods, respectively, and patient outcomes were compared. Significant reductions in the mean durations of intensive care unit stay (3.44 ± 9.08 vs. 2.55 ± 7.89 days; p = 0.035), ventilator use (5.73 ± 12.14 vs. 4.22 ± 10.23 days; p = 0.007), piperacillin/tazobactam administration (0.954 ± 3.159 vs. 0.660 ± 2.217 days, p = 0.029), and cefoperazone/sulbactam administration (0.058 ± 0.737 vs. 0.331 ± 1.803 days, p = 0.0001) occurred. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that CPG-implementation was associated with favorable clinical outcomes (adjusted odds ratio 1.286, 95% confidence interval: 1.004–1.647, p = 0.046). Among patients who provided follow-up cultures (n = 284), favorable microbiological responses were significantly less frequent during the pre-implementation period than the post-implementation period (80.35% vs. 91.89%; p = 0.01). In conclusion, the locally developed CPG implementation is feasible and effective in improving patient outcomes and reducing ATB consumption. Hospital antimicrobial stewardship teams should be able to facilitate CPG development and implementation for antimicrobial therapy for common infections. Full article
14 pages, 898 KiB  
Article
Safety and Efficacy of Ivermectin for the Prevention and Treatment of COVID-19: A Double-Blinded Randomized Placebo-Controlled Study
by Nasikarn Angkasekwinai, Pinyo Rattanaumpawan, Methee Chayakulkeeree, Pakpoom Phoompoung, Pornpan Koomanachai, Sorawit Chantarasut, Walaiporn Wangchinda, Varalak Srinonprasert and Visanu Thamlikitkul
Antibiotics 2022, 11(6), 796; https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics11060796 - 12 Jun 2022
Cited by 7 | Viewed by 13127
Abstract
The safety and efficacy of ivermectin for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19 are still controversial topics. From August to November 2021, we conducted a double-blinded, randomized controlled trial at Siriraj Hospital, Thailand. Eligible participants were adults ≥ 18 years with suspected COVID-19 [...] Read more.
The safety and efficacy of ivermectin for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19 are still controversial topics. From August to November 2021, we conducted a double-blinded, randomized controlled trial at Siriraj Hospital, Thailand. Eligible participants were adults ≥ 18 years with suspected COVID-19 who underwent a SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR test. After enrollment, the participants were randomized to receive either ivermectin (400–600 µg/kg/d) or placebo once daily for 3 days. Among 983 participants, 536 (54.5%) with a negative RT-PCR result were enrolled in the prevention study, and 447 (45.5%) with a positive RT-PCR result were enrolled in the treatment study. In the prevention study, the incidence of COVID-19 on Day 14 was similar between the ivermectin and the placebo group (4.7% vs. 5.2%; p = 0.844; Δ = −0.4%; 95% CI; −4.3–3.5%). In the treatment study, there was no significant difference between the ivermectin and placebo group for any Day 14 treatment outcome: proportion with oxygen desaturation (2.7% vs. 1.9%; p = 0.75), change in WHO score from baseline (1 [−5, 1] vs. 1 [−5, 1]; p = 0.50), and symptom resolution (76% vs. 82.2%; p = 0.13). The ivermectin group had a significantly higher proportion of transient blurred vision (5.6% vs. 0.6%; p < 0.001). Our study failed to demonstrate the efficacy of a 3-day once daily of ivermectin for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19. The given regimen of ivermectin should not be used for either prevention or treatment of COVID-19 in populations with a high rate of COVID-19 vaccination. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Antibacterial Therapy in Adults with COVID-19)
Show Figures

Figure 1

11 pages, 243 KiB  
Article
Impact of Antibiotic Authorisation at Three Provincial Hospitals in Thailand: Results from a Quasi-Experimental Study
by Walaiporn Wangchinda, Jintana Srisompong, Sunee Chayangsu, Darat Ruangkriengsin, Visanu Thamlikitkul, Pornpan Koomanachai, Rujipas Sirijatuphat and Pinyo Rattanaumpawan
Antibiotics 2022, 11(3), 354; https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics11030354 - 7 Mar 2022
Cited by 3 | Viewed by 2364
Abstract
Implementing antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) at non-university hospitals is challenging. A quasi-experimental study was conducted to determine the impact of customised antibiotic authorisation implementation on antimicrobial consumption and clinical outcomes at three provincial hospitals in Thailand. Customised pre-authorisation of selected restricted antibiotics and post-authorisation [...] Read more.
Implementing antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) at non-university hospitals is challenging. A quasi-experimental study was conducted to determine the impact of customised antibiotic authorisation implementation on antimicrobial consumption and clinical outcomes at three provincial hospitals in Thailand. Customised pre-authorisation of selected restricted antibiotics and post-authorisation of selected controlled antibiotics were undertaken and implemented at each hospital by the local AMS team with guidance from the AMS team at the university hospital. From January 2019–December 2020, there were 1802 selected patients (901 patients during the pre-implementation period and 901 patients during the post-implementation period). The most commonly used targeted antimicrobial was meropenem (49.61%), followed by piperacillin/tazobactam (36.46%). Comparison of the outcomes of the patients during the pre- and post-implementation periods revealed that the mean day of therapy of the targeted antimicrobials was significantly shorter during the post-implementation period (6.24 vs. 7.64 days; p < 0.001), the favourable clinical response (the improvement in all clinical and laboratory parameters at the end of antibiotic therapy) was significantly higher during the post-implementation period (72.70% vs. 68.04%; p = 0.03) and the mean length of hospital stay was significantly shorter during the post-implementation period (15.78 vs. 18.90 days; p < 0.001). In conclusion, implementation of antibiotic authorisation at provincial hospitals under experienced AMS team’s guidance was feasible and useful. The study results could be a good model for the implementation of customised AMS strategies at other hospitals with limited resources. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Antibiotics Use and Antimicrobial Stewardship)
10 pages, 635 KiB  
Article
Feasibility, Challenges, and Benefits of Global Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance System Implementation: Results from a Multicenter Quasi-Experimental Study
by Rujipas Sirijatuphat, Sunee Chayangsu, Jintana Srisompong, Darat Ruangkriengsin, Visanu Thamlikitkul, Surapee Tiengrim, Walaiporn Wangchinda, Pornpan Koomanachai and Pinyo Rattanaumpawan
Antibiotics 2022, 11(3), 348; https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics11030348 - 6 Mar 2022
Cited by 6 | Viewed by 3503
Abstract
The Global Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance System (GLASS) is one of the pillars of the global action plan on antimicrobial resistance launched by the World Health Organization in 2015. This study was conducted to determine the feasibility and benefits of GLASS as a component [...] Read more.
The Global Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance System (GLASS) is one of the pillars of the global action plan on antimicrobial resistance launched by the World Health Organization in 2015. This study was conducted to determine the feasibility and benefits of GLASS as a component of antimicrobial stewardship strategies in three provincial hospitals in Thailand. Data on the types of bacteria isolated and their antibiotic susceptibility during January–December 2019 and January–April 2020 were retrieved from the microbiology laboratory of each participating hospital. Laboratory-based antibiograms from 2019 and GLASS-based antibiograms from 2020 were created and compared. A total of 14,877 and 3580 bacterial isolates were obtained during January–December 2019 and January–April 2020, respectively. The common bacteria isolated in both periods were Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Acinetobacter baumannii, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Staphylococcus aureus. Hospital-acquired infection (HAI)-related bacteria were observed in 59.0%, whereas community-acquired infection (CAI)-related bacteria were observed in 41.0% of isolates. Antibiotic resistance in CAIs was high and may have been related to the misclassification of colonized bacteria as true pathogens and HAIs as CAIs. The results of this study on AMR surveillance using GLASS methodology may not be valid owing to several inadequate data collections and the problem of specimen contamination. Given these considerations, related personnel should receive additional training on the best practices in specimen collection and the management of AMR surveillance data using the GLASS approach. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Antibiotics Use and Antimicrobial Stewardship)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop