Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://ahro.austin.org.au/austinjspui/handle/1/21982
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorUrbancic, Karen F-
dc.contributor.authorThursky, Karin-
dc.contributor.authorKong, David C M-
dc.contributor.authorJohnson, Paul D R-
dc.contributor.authorSlavin, Monica A-
dc.date.accessioned2019-10-29T05:19:19Z-
dc.date.available2019-10-29T05:19:19Z-
dc.date.issued2018-12-
dc.identifier.citationCurrent opinion in infectious diseases 2018; 31(6): 490-498-
dc.identifier.urihttps://ahro.austin.org.au/austinjspui/handle/1/21982-
dc.description.abstractTo outline key drivers and components of antifungal stewardship (AFS) programmes, the evidence for specific interventions, and methods to assess performance of programmes. Recent developments in antifungal resistance and breakthrough invasive fungal diseases have increased the urgency for effective AFS. In practice, however, few hospitals have dedicated AFS programmes. To date, AFS programmes have centred around the provision of expert bedside reviews and have reduced costs and consumption of antifungal agents. Incorporating tools such as fungal diagnostics and therapeutic drug monitoring into AFS programme models is recommended. However, the application and impact of these tools in this context have not been adequately assessed. The effectiveness of AFS programmes has been measured in multiple ways but a standardized method of evaluation remains elusive. Few studies have explored the impact of AFS interventions on patient outcomes. The uptake of formal AFS programmes has been slow. New initiatives integrating AFS tools in programmes, and measuring the impacts on patient outcomes are required given such data are not readily available. A comprehensive approach to evaluate AFS programmes by correlating the quantity and quality of antifungal prescribing with impacts on patient outcomes is needed. Consensus definitions for core AFS metrics are required to benchmark performance and are essential to the resourcing and sustainability of these programmes.-
dc.language.isoeng-
dc.titleAntifungal stewardship: developments in the field.-
dc.typeJournal Article-
dc.identifier.journaltitleCurrent opinion in infectious diseases-
dc.identifier.affiliationDepartment of Infectious Diseases, Austin Health, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australiaen
dc.identifier.affiliationInfectious Diseases Unit, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centreen
dc.identifier.affiliationVictorian Infectious Diseases Service, The Peter Doherty Institute for Immunity and Infection, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkvilleen
dc.identifier.affiliationNational Centre for Antimicrobial Stewardshipen
dc.identifier.affiliationPharmacy Department, Ballarat Health Services, Ballaraten
dc.identifier.affiliationCentre for Medicine Use and Safety, Monash University, Parkvilleen
dc.identifier.affiliationNational Centre for Infections in Cancer, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centreen
dc.identifier.affiliationDepartment of Medicine, University of Melbourne, Parkvilleen
dc.identifier.affiliationPharmacy Department, Austin Health, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australiaen
dc.identifier.doi10.1097/QCO.0000000000000497-
dc.identifier.orcid0000-0002-9275-578X-
dc.identifier.orcid0000-0001-9873-7163-
dc.identifier.pubmedid30299362-
dc.type.austinJournal Article-
dc.type.austinResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't-
dc.type.austinReview-
local.name.researcherJohnson, Paul D R
item.openairetypeJournal Article-
item.fulltextNo Fulltext-
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_18cf-
item.languageiso639-1en-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
item.grantfulltextnone-
crisitem.author.deptPharmacy-
crisitem.author.deptInfectious Diseases-
Appears in Collections:Journal articles
Show simple item record

Page view(s)

86
checked on Jan 28, 2025

Google ScholarTM

Check


Items in AHRO are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.