Multicentre trial of antepartum low-dose anti-D immunoglobulin. Pharmacy-implemented guidelines on switching from intravenous to oral antibiotics: an intervention study.
Routine antenatal Rh immunoprophylaxis would substantially increase the use of anti-D Ig in the U.K. As availability of anti-D Ig is one factor influencing a decision to introduce routine antenatal prophylaxis, a trial was undertaken to test the efficacy of a lower dose of anti-D Ig than that used in earlier studies. RhD-negative primigravidae were randomized as controls or recipients of two doses of 250iu of anti-D Ig given at 28 and 34 weeks gestation. Blood samples were tested at delivery and at 6 months postpartum for the presence of immune anti-D, and again later if results were equivocal. Nine (1.5%) out of 595 control patients had immune anti-D at follow-up at 6 months and later; 4 (0.78%) of 513 treated women were immunized. It was concluded that, while two doses of 250iu of anti-D Ig may reduce alloimmunization, they are not as effective as two doses of 500iu in a previous trial. 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.
It appears that IM and IV administration of anti-D are equally effective. The number of included studies and the number of participants are not enough to assess whether there are any differences. Anti-D can be administered by IM or IV injection. The choice of IM or IV route of administration will depend on the available preparations, the dose to be administered and also on the patients' preferences. This review found insufficient information upon which to guide practice due to the limited number of included studies, small sample sizes and methodological limitations.