METHODS: We propose a type III hybrid implementation/effectiveness interventional cohort trial in 35 ICUs in up to 11 low- and middle- income countries. The study intervention is a structured review of antimicrobial prescriptions as recommended by the World Health Organisation. Strategies to support stakeholder-led implementation include development of local protocols, registry-enabled audit and feedback, and education. Evaluation of implementation, and the determinants of its success, is informed by the RE-AIM framework and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research respectively. The primary outcome is a composite measure of fidelity, reach and adoption. Secondary outcomes describe the effectiveness of the intervention on improving antimicrobial prescribing. Qualitative interviews will assess relevant implementation acceptability, adaptations and maintenance. A baseline survey will investigate ICU-level antimicrobial stewardship structures and processes.

DISCUSSION: This study addresses global policy priorities by supporting implementation research of antimicrobial stewardship, and strengthening associated healthcare professional competencies. It does this in a setting where improvement is sorely needed: low- and middle- income country ICUs. The study will also describe the influence of pre-existing antimicrobial stewardship structures and processes on implementation and improve understanding about the efficacy of strategies to overcome barriers to implementation in these settings.

METHODS: Using rapid evaluation methods, we will use four data collection methods: 1) registry embedded indicators to assess quality of care processes and their associated outcomes; 2) process mapping to provide a preliminary framework to understand gaps between current and desired care practices; 3) structured observations of processes of interest identified from the process mapping and; 4) focus group discussions with stakeholders to identify barriers and enablers influencing the gap between current and desired care practices. We will also collect self-assessments of readiness for quality improvement. Data collection and analysis will be led by local stakeholders, performed in parallel and through an iterative process across eight countries: Kenya, India, Malaysia, Nepal, Pakistan, South Africa, Uganda and Vietnam.

METHODS: An international multidisciplinary Steering Committee with expertise in sepsis management and including a Delphi methodologist was convened by the Asia Pacific Sepsis Alliance (APSA). The committee selected an international panel of clinicians and researchers with expertise in sepsis management. A Delphi process based on an iterative approach was used to obtain the final consensus statements.

RESULTS: A stable consensus was achieved for 30 (94%) of the statements by 41 experts after four survey rounds. These include consensus on managing patients with sepsis outside a designated critical care area, triggers for escalating clinical management and criteria for safe transfer to another facility. The experts agreed on the following: in the absence of serum lactate, clinical parameters such as altered mental status, capillary refill time and urine output may be used to guide resuscitation; special considerations regarding the volume of fluid used for resuscitation, especially in tropical infections, including the use of simple tests to assess fluid responsiveness when facilities for advanced hemodynamic monitoring are limited; use of Ringer's lactate or Hartmann's solution as balanced salt solutions; epinephrine when norepinephrine or vasopressin are unavailable; and the administration of vasopressors via a peripheral vein if central venous access is unavailable or not feasible. Similarly, where facilities for investigation are unavailable, there was consensus for empirical antimicrobial administration without delay when sepsis was strongly suspected, as was the empirical use of antiparasitic agents in patients with suspicion of parasitic infections.