Interventions to Improve Antimicrobial Stewardship for Older People in Care Homes: A Systematic Review

  • Hoa Q. Nguyen
  • Michael M. Tunney
  • Carmel M. HughesEmail author
Systematic Review



Inappropriate antimicrobial prescribing has been reported in care homes. This may result in serious drug-related adverse events, Clostridium difficile colonization, and the development of antimicrobial resistance among care home residents. Interventions to improve antibiotic prescribing in nursing homes have been reported through clinical trials, but whether antifungal and antiviral prescribing and residential homes have been considered, or how outcomes were measured and reported in such interventions, remains unclear.


Our aims were to evaluate the effect of interventions to improve antimicrobial stewardship in care homes and to report the outcomes used in these trials.


We searched 11 electronic databases and five trial registries for studies published until 30 November 2018. Inclusion criteria for the review were randomized controlled trials, targeting care home residents and healthcare professionals, providing interventions to improve antimicrobial prescribing compared with usual care or other interventions. The Cochrane tools for assessing risk of bias were used for quality assessment. A narrative approach was taken because of heterogeneity across the studies.


Five studies met the inclusion criteria. The studies varied in terms of types of infection, key targets, delivery of interventions, and reported outcomes. In total, 27 outcomes were reported across the studies, with seven not prespecified in the methods. The interventions had little impact on adherence to guidelines and prevalence of antimicrobial prescribing; they appeared to decrease total antimicrobial consumption but were unlikely to have affected overall hospital admissions and mortality. The overall quality of evidence was low because the risk of bias was high across the studies.


The interventions had limited effect on improving antimicrobial prescribing but did not appear to cause harm to care home residents. The low quality of evidence and heterogeneity in outcome measurement suggest the need for future well-designed studies and the development of a core outcome set to best evaluate the effectiveness of antimicrobial stewardship in care homes.



The authors thank Ms. Angela Thompson (Queen’s University Belfast) for her assistance with developing the search strategy and Dr. Audrey Rankin (Queen’s University Belfast) for her advice on the content of data extraction sheets.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Ethical approval

As this was a systematic review, ethical approval to conduct the study was not required.

Conflict of interest

Hoa Nguyen, Michael Tunney, and Carmel Hughes have no conflicts of interest that are directly relevant to the content of this article.


Hoa Nguyen is supported by a PhD research scholarship from the Vietnam International Education Cooperation Development in Vietnam. The funder played no role in the design, analysis, or conduct of the study.

Supplementary material

40266_2019_637_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (324 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (PDF 324 kb)
40266_2019_637_MOESM2_ESM.pdf (352 kb)
Supplementary material 2 (PDF 352 kb)


  1. 1.
    United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division. World Population Ageing; 2015. Accessed 31 Aug 2018.
  2. 2.
    McClean P, Hughes C, Tunney M, Goossens H, Jans B. Antimicrobial prescribing in European nursing homes. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2011;66(7):1609–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. Point prevalence survey of healthcare-associated infections and antimicrobial use in European long-term care facilities. April–May 2013. Stockholm; 2014. Accessed 31 Aug 2018.
  4. 4.
    Stuart RL, Wilson J, Bellaard-Smith E, et al. Antibiotic use and misuse in residential aged care facilities. Intern Med J. 2012;42(10):1145–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    McClean P, Tunney M, Gilpin D, Parsons C, Hughes C. Antimicrobial prescribing in residential homes. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2012;67(7):1781–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Van Buul LW, Van der Steen JT, Veenhuizen RB, et al. Antibiotic use and resistance in long term care facilities. J Am Med Direct Assoc. 2012;13(6):568.e1–13. Scholar
  7. 7.
    Van Buul LW, Veenhuizen RB, Achterberg WP, et al. Antibiotic prescribing in Dutch nursing homes: how appropriate is it? J Am Med Direct Assoc. 2015;16(3):229–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lim CJ, Kong DC, Stuart RL. Reducing inappropriate antibiotic prescribing in the residential care setting: current perspectives. Clin Interv Aging. 2014;9:165–77.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Peron EP, Hirsch AA, Jury LA, Jump RL, Donskey CJ. Another setting for stewardship: high rate of unnecessary antimicrobial use in a veterans affairs long-term care facility. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2013;61(2):289–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sundvall P-D, Stuart B, Davis M, Roderick P, Moore M. Antibiotic use in the care home setting: a retrospective cohort study analysing routine data. BMC Geriatr. 2015;15(1):71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Corsonello A, Abbatecola AM, Fusco S, et al. The impact of drug interactions and polypharmacy on antimicrobial therapy in the elderly. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2015;21(1):20–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fletcher KR, Cinalli M. Identification, optimal management, and infection control measures for Clostridium difficile-associated disease in long-term care. Geriatr Nurs (Minneap). 2007;28(3):171–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    World Health Organization. Global action plan on antimicrobial resistance; 2015. Accessed 31 Aug 2018.
  14. 14.
    World Health Organization. Antimicrobial resistance: global report on surveillance; 2014. Accessed 31 Aug 2018.
  15. 15.
    Smith PW, Bennett G, Bradley S, et al. SHEA/APIC guideline: infection prevention and control in the long-term care facility. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2008;29(9):785–814.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Fishman N. Policy Statement on Antimicrobial Stewardship by the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (SHEA), the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA), and the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society (PIDS). Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2012;33(04):322–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Antimicrobial stewardship : systems and processes for effective antimicrobial medicine use, NICE guideline [NG15]; 2015. Accessed 31 Aug 2018.
  18. 18.
    Rhee SM, Stone ND. Antimicrobial stewardship in long-term care facilities. Infect Dis Clin North Am. 2014;28(2):237–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Barlam TF, Cosgrove SE, Abbo LM, et al. Executive summary: implementing an antibiotic stewardship program: guidelines by the infectious diseases society of America and the society for healthcare epidemiology of America. Clin Infect Dis. 2016;62(10):1197–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Fleming A, Browne J, Byrne S. The effect of interventions to reduce potentially inappropriate antibiotic prescribing in long-term care facilities: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials. Drugs Aging. 2013;30(6):401–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Feldstein D, Sloane PD, Feltner C. Antibiotic stewardship programs in nursing homes: a systematic review. J Am Med Direct Assoc. 2018;19(2):110–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Clarke M, Williamson PR. Core outcome sets and systematic reviews. Syst Rev. 2016;5:11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Beuscart JB, Pont LG, Thevelin S, et al. A systematic review of the outcomes reported in trials of medication review in older patients: the need for a core outcome set. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2017;83(5):942–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009;6(7):e1000097. Scholar
  25. 25.
    Nguyen H, Hughes C, Tunney M. Interventions to improve antimicrobial stewardship for older people in care homes. PROSPERO 2017 CRD42017070116; 2017. Accessed 31 Aug 2018.
  26. 26.
    Rodrigues R, Huber M, Lamura G, editors. Facts and figures on healthy ageing and long-term care. Vienna: European Centre for Social Welfare Policy and Research; 2012. Accessed 31 Aug 2018.
  27. 27.
    Davey P, Marwick C, Scott C, et al. Interventions to improve antibiotic prescribing practices for hospital inpatients. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;2:CD003543. Scholar
  28. 28.
    Higgins J, Altman D, Sterne J. Assessing risk of bias in included studies, chapter 8. In: Higgins JPT, Green S, editors. Cochrane Handb Syst Rev Interv; 2011. Accessed 31 Aug 2018.
  29. 29.
    Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC). Suggested risk of bias criteria for EPOC reviews. EPOC Resources for review authors. Oslo: Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services; 2016. Accessed 31 Aug 2018.
  30. 30.
    Naughton B, Mylotte J, Ramadan F, Karuza J, Priore R. Antibiotic use, hospital admissions, and mortality before and after implementing guidelines for nursing home-acquired pneumonia. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2001;49(8):1020–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Loeb M, Brazil K, Lohfeld L, et al. Effect of a multifaceted intervention on number of antimicrobial prescriptions for suspected urinary tract infections in residents of nursing homes: cluster randomised controlled trial. Br Med J. 2005;331(7518):669–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Monette J, Miller MA, Monette M, et al. Effect of an educational intervention on optimizing antibiotic prescribing in long-term care facilities. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2007;55(8):1231–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Pettersson E, Vernby Å, Mölstad S, Lundborg CS. Can a multifaceted educational intervention targeting both nurses and physicians change the prescribing of antibiotics to nursing home residents? A cluster randomized controlled trial. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2011;66(11):2659–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Fleet E, Rao GG, Patel B, et al. Impact of implementation of a novel antimicrobial stewardship tool on antibiotic use in nursing homes: a prospective cluster randomized control pilot study. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2014;69(8):2265–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Naughton B, Mylotte J. Treatment guideline for nursing home-acquired pneumonia based on community practice. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2000;48:82–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Ivers NM, Halperin IJ, Barnsley J, et al. Allocation techniques for balance at baseline in cluster randomized trials: a methodological review. Trials. 2012;13:1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Jones CW, Keil LG, Holland WC, Caughey MC, Platts-Mills TF. Comparison of registered and published outcomes in randomized controlled trials: a systematic review. BMC Med. 2015;13:282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Ioannidis JP, Caplan AL, Dal-Ré R. Outcome reporting bias in clinical trials: why monitoring matters. BMJ. 2017;356:j408. Scholar
  39. 39.
    Lancee M, Lemmens CMC, Kahn RS, Vinkers CH, Luykx JJ. Outcome reporting bias in randomized-controlled trials investigating antipsychotic drugs. Transl Psychiatry. 2017;7(9):e1232. Scholar
  40. 40.
    Smyth RMD, Kirkham JJ, Jacoby A, Altman DG, Gamble C, Williamson PR. Frequency and reasons for outcome reporting bias in clinical trials: interviews with trialists. BMJ. 2011;342:c7153. Scholar
  41. 41.
    Montoya A, Mody L. Common infections in nursing homes: a review of current issues and challenges. Aging Health. 2011;7(6):889–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Flevari A, Theodorakopoulou M, Velegraki A, Armaganidis A, Dimopoulos G. Treatment of invasive candidiasis in the elderly: a review. Clin Interv Aging. 2013;8:1199–208.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Lubeek SFK, van der Geer ER, van Gelder MMHJ, Koopmans RTCM, van de Kerkhof PCM, Gerritsen MJP. Current dermatologic care in Dutch nursing homes and possible improvements: a nationwide survey. J Am Med Direct Assoc. 2015;16(8):714.e1–6. Scholar
  44. 44.
    Jiang Y-C, Feng H, Lin Y-C, Guo X-R. New strategies against drug resistance to herpes simplex virus. Int J Oral Sci. 2016;8(1):1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Li TCM, Chan MCW, Lee N. Clinical implications of antiviral resistance in influenza. Viruses. 2015;7(9):4929–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Wiederhold N. Antifungal resistance: current trends and future strategies to combat. Infect Drug Resist. 2017;10:249–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Pakyz AL, Dwyer LL. Prevalence of antimicrobial use among united states nursing home residents: results from a national survey. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2010;31(6):661–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Schechner V, Temkin E, Harbarth S, Carmeli Y, Schwaber MJ. Epidemiological interpretation of studies examining the effect of antibiotic usage on resistance. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2013;26(2):289–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Dik J-WH, Hendrix R, Poelman R, et al. Measuring the impact of antimicrobial stewardship programs. Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther Internet. 2016;14(6):569–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Dodds Ashley ES, Kaye KS, DePestel DD, Hermsen ED. Antimicrobial stewardship: philosophy versus practice. Clin Infect Dis. 2014;59(S3):S112–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    McGowan JE. Antimicrobial stewardship—the state of the art in 2011 focus on outcome and methods. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2012;33(04):331–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Bell BG, Schellevis F, Stobberingh E, Goossens H, Pringle M. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects of antibiotic consumption on antibiotic resistance. BMC Infect Dis. 2014;14(13):1–25.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Monnet DL. Measuring antimicrobial use: the way forward. Clin Infect Dis. 2007;44(5):671–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Neilly MDJ, Guthrie B, Santiago VH, Vadiveloo T, Donnan PT, Marwick CA. Has primary care antimicrobial use really been increasing? Comparison of changes in different prescribing measures for a complete geographic population 1995–2014. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2017;72:2921–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Polk RE, Fox C, Mahoney A, Letcavage J, MacDougall C. Measurement of adult antibacterial drug use in 130 US hospitals: comparison of defined daily dose and days of therapy. Clin Infect Dis. 2007;44(5):664–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Costelleo C, Metcalfe C, Lovering A, Mant D, Hay AD. Effect of antibiotic prescribing in primary care on antimicrobial resistance in individual patients: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2010;340:c2096. Scholar
  57. 57.
    Llewelyn MJ, Darwin E, Tonkin-Crine S, et al. The antibiotic course has had its day. Br Dent J. 2017;223(5):337.Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Falagas ME, Karageorgopoulos DE, Grammatikos AP, Matthaiou DK. Effectiveness and safety of short vs. long duration of antibiotic therapy for acute bacterial sinusitis: a meta-analysis of randomized trials. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2009;67(2):161–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Dimopoulos G, Matthaiou DK, Karageorgopoulos DE, Grammatikos AP, Athanassa Z, Falagas ME. Short- versus long-course antibacterial therapy for community-acquired pneumonia: a meta-analysis. Drugs. 2008;68(13):1841–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Moehring RW, Anderson DJ, Cochran RL, Hicks LA, Srinivasan A, Ashley ESD. Expert consensus on metrics to assess the impact of patient-level antimicrobial stewardship interventions in acute-care settings. Clin Infect Dis. 2017;64(3):377–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Morris AM. Antimicrobial stewardship programs: appropriate measures and metrics to study their impact. Curr Treat Options Infect Dis. 2014;6(2):101–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Antimicrobial stewardship: prescribing antibiotics, key therapeutic topic [KTT9] [Internet]; 2015. Accessed 31 Aug 2018.
  63. 63.
    Center for Disease Dynamics, Economics and Policy. State of the world’s antibiotics, 2015. Washington, DC: CDDEP; 2015. Accessed 31 Aug 2018.
  64. 64.
    Williamson PR, Altman DG, Bagley H, et al. The COMET handbook: version 1.0. Trials. 2017;18(S3):280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Williamson PR, Altman DG, Blazeby JM, et al. Developing core outcome sets for clinical trials: issues to consider. Trials. 2012;13:132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Pharmacy, Medical Biology CentreQueen’s University BelfastBelfastUK

Personalised recommendations