Aura 2016 Supplementary data

Introduction

This report provides supplementary data for AURA 2016: first Australian report on antimicrobial use and resistance in human health (AURA 2016). It includes additional detail relating to Chapter 3: ‘Antimicrobial use and appropriateness’ and Chapter 4: ‘Antimicrobial resistance’. Tables and figures in this supplementary data are numbered according to the relevant chapter.

Sources of data for antimicrobial use and appropriateness

Chapter 3 of AURA 2016 describes patterns and trends in use of antimicrobials, and is based on data collected by five programs:

The National Antimicrobial Prescribing Survey (NAPS) is an audit performed by hospitals to assess antimicrobial prescribing practices and appropriateness of prescribing within the hospital. Data is reported nationally from this program every year, and hospitals are able to interrogate their own data within the audit tool.

The Aged Care National Antimicrobial Prescribing Survey (acNAPS) is a pilot program based on the NAPS model. It is an audit of antimicrobial prescribing and appropriateness of prescribing in residential aged care facilities.

The National Antimicrobial Utilisation Surveillance Program (NAUSP) collects, analyses and reports data on use of antimicrobials at the hospital level. Participating hospitals receive bimonthly reports of their own data, and national reports are prepared annually.

The NPS MedicineWise MedicineInsight program collects data on antimicrobial prescribing in general practice. Data is provided to participating general practitioners, and reported elsewhere on an ad hoc basis.

The Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) and the Repatriation Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (RPBS) collect data on antimicrobials dispensed under the PBS/RPBS, which is reported annually.

These sources of data reflect prescriptions for antimicrobials, use of antimicrobials and appropriateness of prescribing in public and private hospitals across Australia, as well as dispensing within the community.

Sources of data for antimicrobial resistance

Chapter 4 of AURA 2016 describes rates of resistance for priority organisms, and is based on data collected by five programs:

The Australian Group on Antimicrobial Resistance (AGAR) collects, analyses and reports on data on priority organisms such as Enterobacteriaceae species, Enterococcus species and Staphylococcus aureus. Data is reported nationally for three AGAR programs every year.

The Queensland Health OrgTRx system collects, analyses and reports on data on antimicrobial resistance in public hospitals across Queensland. Participants in OrgTRx can access their own data and run ad hoc reports within the system. There is currently no national reporting of OrgTRx data.

The Australian National Neisseria Network (NNN) conducts the national laboratory surveillance programs for Neisseria gonorrhoeae and N. meningitidis. Data from the NNN programs are published quarterly and annually in the journal Communicable Diseases Intelligence.

The National Notifiable Diseases Surveillance System (NNDSS) collects data on Mycobacterium tuberculosis, and data is published annually in Communicable Diseases Intelligence. The Australian Mycobacterium Reference Laboratory Network provides drug susceptibility data on M. tuberculosis isolates to state and territory public health units for inclusion in the NNDSS.

Sullivan Nicolaides Pathology (SNP) collects data on antimicrobial resistance among organisms in the community, and acute and residential aged care facilities. Data on rates of resistance for SNP facilities has not previously been published nationally.

AURA 2016 Chapter 3: antimicrobial use and appropriateness tables

Table S3.1 Number of hospitals contributing to the National Antimicrobial Utilisation Surveillance Program, by peer group, 2005–14

Year	Principal referral	Large public acute	Medium public acute
2005	13	8	4
2006	15	9	4
2007	16	9	5
2008	18	12	7
2009	18	16	9
2010	18	18	9
2011	20	22	10
2012	25	32	13
2013	28	42	24
2014	28	51	26

Note: Data from small public hospital and specialist women’s hospital peer groups is excluded because the number of contributors was small.

Source: NAUSP, 2014