We are launching our latest TRIC Network project – TRIC-MAN!
TRIC-MAN is a national audit of antimicrobial stewardship and resistance in critical care units across the UK, in collaboration with ICS and infection groups NITCAR and ESPAUR.
It will involve a fourteen-day data collection period to start anytime from the 31st March – 14th April 2025.
This is an excellent opportunity to be involved in a national audit on one of the most critical issues in intensive care medicine.
We are still looking for regional and local site leads and are keen to involve all members of the MDT.
All collaborators will be cited in any publication of TRIC-MAN. If interested please get in touch via tricmanstudy@gmail.com, or click 'contact us' below
A webinar with the project lead Dr Oliver Hamilton is displayed below
More detail is available below, with the site information downloadable at the bottom of the page
Please reach us at tricmanstudy@gmail.com if you cannot find an answer to your question.
Should we only audit those newly admitted during the “Day 0”, not those who are already there?
No. All patients already admitted on the ICU plus those newly admitted during the Day 0 (between 0000-2359) should be enrolled.
How is elective vs emergency surgery defined?
As per the protocol, elective surgery is defined as surgery scheduled > 24 hours in advance and emergency surgery as that scheduled within 24 hours of operation
If a new antimicrobial was changed yesterday from a different one, is that the date that I use on the patient demographics form?
No. You would use the date an antimicrobial was first prescribed for that episode of infection/that indication.
For example, if someone was on Meropenem for a VAP for 5 days, and was yesterday changed to co-amoxiclav – the start date would be 5 days ago.
Do I enter all the antimicrobials for the cohort that have been on antimicrobials for >3 days?
You enter all the current antimicrobials on Day 0 but you don’t add any of the ones that have already stopped.
Similarly, you wouldn’t add any new ones that are prescribed after Day 0 for this group (unlike the group who have been on antimicrobials for ≤3 days).
Can I write “as per micro” as the reason for antimicrobial?
It would be better to give the reason why they chose that if that’s possible (maybe by speaking to others in the clinical team if it’s not clear). If it’s outside of guidance with no documentation as to why, then choose that option (the next question will ask if it was discussed with micro/ID anyway and this will be picked up in analysis).
When do I answer “empiric” vs “targeted against known organism”?
If there is a current or old microbiological culture result that is being used to guide therapy choices – then choose “targeted”. If the antimicrobial is being prescribed ‘blindly’ against what is most likely to be causing the infection, then choose “empiric”.
What if the antimicrobial is named on the antimicrobial guideline but a different dose or course-length is chosen?
You can still answer “yes” to "prescribed as per antimicrobial guideline". In this question we are talking about the choice of medication.
If someone has been on antimicrobials for >3 days, but then starts a new antimicrobial for a different indication ≤3 days ago, which cohort do they go into?
Choose the earliest start date for any antimicrobial that is currently prescribed. So, for this case they would go into the >3 day cohort.
What “source” (e.g., community-, hospital- or ICU-acquired) should we put in for surgical prophylaxis?
Choose wherever the underlying need for surgery arose. E.g., if developed the surgical issue at home then choose “community-acquired”
Does every patient need a microbiology form opening?
No. This is only for those who have positive culture results of the type specified in the protocol (blood cultures, BAL, urine, line tips etc.) in those in the prospective cohort.
We aren’t recording negative results or other samples in this audit.
Not every sample type is listed, for example, how do I put in a sputum result?
If the sample type isn’t listed then it doesn’t need entering. This is an audit/service evaluation and therefore we aren’t collecting every single type of sample – just key ones that might be driving antimicrobial prescription changes.
So things like standard sputum, wound swabs etc are not on the list and don’t need entering.
Presentation delivered at the 3/3/25 TRIC-MAN webinar
TRIC-MAN is a two week long, national audit of antimicrobial stewardship and resistance in critical care units across the UK.
The project aims to evaluate adherence to UKHSA and NICE guidance, explore antimicrobial stewardship and infection prevention practices, and assess antimicrobial resistance in invasive priority pathogens and will be the first of its kind for over 20 years.
It is being run by the Trainee Research in Intensive Care (TRIC) Network.
For patients with sepsis, the Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines state that “early administration of appropriate antimicrobials is one of the most effective interventions to reduce mortality”. The use of antibiotics with insufficient antimicrobial coverage is associated with worse outcomes. This is against a backdrop of increasing antimicrobial resistance (AMR), a global threat to public health, responsible for over a million excess deaths worldwide.
It is over twenty years since the last national survey of antibiotic use specifically in Intensive Care Units (ICUs) in the UK. In this survey, 11% of patients had admission prescriptions changed due to antibiotic resistance and 13% of patients had multiple resistance. Given that around 70% of critically ill patients are treated with antibiotics and per-capita antibiotic use is highest in intensive care units in secondary care, it is essential to regularly evaluate the use of these drugs.
There is also a high prevalence of antimicrobial resistance in ICUs across Europe and the rest of the world. However, comparatively little is known about the prevalence of AMR in ICUs in the UK. For example, resistance data for UK ICUs is not routinely reported by English surveillance programme for antimicrobial utilisation and resistance (ESPAUR), the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) or the World Health Organisation.
The study will use a similar methodology to point prevalence surveys conducted by ESPAUR and the ECDC with additional data collected on antimicrobial resistance and reasons behind antimicrobial choices.
The study will be conducted over a two-week period in March/April 2025 and should be a similar commitment to the recent TRIC projects ID-ACCT and NEAT-ECHO.
All clinicians who contribute to data collection at a site will be named as a collaborator. Clinicians will also be able to use this as evidence of involvement in audit for ARCP or job applications.
Please find below a collection of files about the project