Skip to main content

Table 3 Comparison of intervention for AMS between small/middle-sized hospitals and large hospitals

From: Nationwide cross-sectional study of antimicrobial stewardship and antifungal stewardship programs in inpatient settings in Japan

  Total
n = 39
Small/middle-sized hospitals (≤ 500 beds)
n = 21
Large hospitals
(≥ 501 beds)
n = 18
OR 95% CI p value
Intervention within 7 days
 Overall 17 (43.6) 13 (61.9) 4 (22.2) 5.7 1.4–23.5 0.023
  Carbapenem 16 (41.0) 12 (57.1) 4 (22.2) 4.7 1.1–19.1 0.049
  3rd generation cephalosporine 1 (2.6) 1 (4.8) 0 (0)    
  4th generation cephalosporine 7 (17.9) 6 (28.6) 1 (5.6) 6.8 0.7–63.1 0.098
  Piperacillin/tazobactam 12 (30.8) 10 (47.6) 2 (11.1) 7.3 1.3–39.9 0.018
  Intravenous quinolone 13 (30.8) 11 (52.4) 2 (11.1) 8.8 1.6–48.2 0.008
Intervention within 28 days
 Overall 34 (87.2) 20 (95.2) 14 (77.8) 5.7 0.6–56.7 0.16
  Carbapenem 34 (87.2) 20 (95.2) 14 (77.8) 5.7 0.6–56.7 0.16
  3rd generation cephalosporine 11 (28.2) 7 (33.3) 4 (22.2) 1.8 0.4–7.4 0.50
  4th generation cephalosporine 20 (51.3) 13 (61.9) 7 (38.9) 2.6 0.7–9.3 0.21
  Piperacillin/tazobactam 23 (59.0) 14 (66.7) 9 (50.0) 2.0 0.6–7.3 0.34
  Intravenous quinolone 22 (56.4) 14 (66.7) 8 (44.4) 2.5 0.7–9.2 0.21
  1. Unless otherwise stated, data are presented as n (%)
  2. AMS antimicrobial stewardship, OR odds ratio, CI confidential interval