Dataset Information

Global survey of polymyxin use: A call for international guidelines.

ABSTRACT: Polymyxins (polymyxin B and colistin) are older bactericidal antibiotics that are increasingly used to treat infections caused by multidrug-resistant (MDR) Gram-negative bacteria. However, dosing and clinical use of these drugs vary widely. This survey was undertaken to reveal how polymyxins are used worldwide. Data were collected through a structured online questionnaire consisting of 24 questions regarding colistin usage patterns and indications as well as colistin dosage for adult patients. The questionnaire was disseminated in 2011 to relevant experts worldwide and was completed by 284 respondents from 56 different countries. Respondents from 11/56 countries (20%) had no access to colistin; 58/284 respondents (20.4%) reported that in 2010 they experienced that colistin was not available when needed. Formulations of polymyxins used were reported as: colistimethate sodium (48.6%); colistin sulfate (14.1%); both (1.4%); polymyxin B (1.4%); and unknown. Intravenous formulations were used by 84.2%, aerosolised or nebulised colistin by 44.4% and oral colistin for selective gut decontamination by 12.7%. Common indications for intravenous colistin were ventilator-associated pneumonia, sepsis and catheter-related infections with MDR Gram-negative bacteria. Only 21.2% of respondents used a colistin-loading dose, mainly in Europe and North America. This survey reveals that the majority of respondents use colistin and a few use polymyxin B. The survey results show that colistin is commonly underdosed. Clear guidance is needed on indications, dosing and antibiotic combinations to improve clinical outcomes and delay the emergence of resistance. Colistin should be considered a last-resort drug and its use should be controlled. International guidelines are urgently needed.

SUBMITTER: Wertheim H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3991322 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Global survey of polymyxin use: A call for international guidelines.

Wertheim Heiman H Van Nguyen Kinh K Hara Gabriel Levy GL Gelband Hellen H Laxminarayan Ramanan R Mouton Johan J Cars Otto O

Journal of global antimicrobial resistance 20130901 3

Polymyxins (polymyxin B and colistin) are older bactericidal antibiotics that are increasingly used to treat infections caused by multidrug-resistant (MDR) Gram-negative bacteria. However, dosing and clinical use of these drugs vary widely. This survey was undertaken to reveal how polymyxins are used worldwide. Data were collected through a structured online questionnaire consisting of 24 questions regarding colistin usage patterns and indications as well as colistin dosage for adult patients. T ...[more]

PMID: 24749079

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundClinical practice guidelines (CPGs) have become increasingly popular, and the methodology to develop guidelines has evolved enormously. However, little attention has been given to the updating process, in contrast to the appraisal of the available literature. We conducted an international survey to identify current practices in CPG updating and explored the need to standardize and improve the methods.MethodsWe developed a questionnaire (28 items) based on a review of the existing literature about guideline updating and expert comments. We carried out the survey between March and July 2009, and it was sent by email to 106 institutions: 69 members of the Guidelines International Network who declared that they developed CPGs; 30 institutions included in the U.S. National Guideline Clearinghouse database that published more than 20 CPGs; and 7 institutions selected by an expert committee.ResultsForty-four institutions answered the questionnaire (42% response rate). In the final analysis, 39 completed questionnaires were included. Thirty-six institutions (92%) reported that they update their guidelines. Thirty-one institutions (86%) have a formal procedure for updating their guidelines, and 19 (53%) have a formal procedure for deciding when a guideline becomes out of date. Institutions describe the process as moderately rigorous (36%) or acknowledge that it could certainly be more rigorous (36%). Twenty-two institutions (61%) alert guideline users on their website when a guideline is older than three to five years or when there is a risk of being outdated. Twenty-five institutions (64%) support the concept of "living guidelines," which are continuously monitored and updated. Eighteen institutions (46%) have plans to design a protocol to improve their guideline-updating process, and 21 (54%) are willing to share resources with other organizations.ConclusionsOur study is the first to describe the process of updating CPGs among prominent guideline institutions across the world, providing a comprehensive picture of guideline updating. There is an urgent need to develop rigorous international standards for this process and to minimize duplication of effort internationally.

Project description:ObjectivesThis survey conducted by the International Society of Radiology and supported by the European Society of Radiology aimed to collect information regarding radiology departments' current practices in the management of patients with COVID-19.MethodsResponses from 50 radiology departments involved in the management of COVID-19 patients representing 33 countries across all continents were analyzed. The analysis revealed important variations in imaging practices related to COVID-19 across the world for different disease severity and various clinical scenarios.ResultsImaging is usually not performed in asymptomatic patients (69% of institutions do not image) but is used at the end of confinement (in 60% of institutions). In the majority of institutions, chest imaging is used in suspected or confirmed patients with COVID-19 (89% and 94%). All imaging departments involved in this survey reported the use of imaging in COVID-19 patients showing severe symptoms or who were critically ill. However, there is a wide variation in imaging modality type used for each clinical scenario. The use of imaging is applied in line with existing guidelines and recommendations in 98% of institutions with structured reporting recorded in 58% of institutions. The vast majority of institutions reported a significant impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the imaging department's routine activity (83%).ConclusionWe believe that the results of this survey will help to understand current heterogeneities in radiology practice and to identify needs and gaps in the organization and function of radiology departments worldwide in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic. The results of this survey may inform the development of an overall strategy for radiology department organization and imaging protocols in pandemic conditions.Key points• The results of this survey, which included responses from 50 radiology departments representing 33 countries, showed important variations in imaging practices related to COVID-19 across the world. • While imaging is usually not performed in asymptomatic patients (69% of institutions), it is used in suspected or confirmed patients with COVID-19, in COVID-19 patients showing severe symptoms or who were critically ill, and at the end of confinement (89%, 94%, 100%, 100%, 60% of institutions, respectively). However, there is a wide variation in imaging modality type used for each clinical scenario. • In 98% of institutions, the use of imaging is applied in line with existing guidelines and recommendations, with structured reporting recorded in 58% of institutions. COVID-19 pandemic made a significant impact on the imaging department's routine activity in 83% of institutions.

Project description:ObjectivesTo investigate authors' awareness and use of authorship guidelines, and to assess their perceptions of the fairness of authorship decisions.DesignA cross-sectional online survey.Setting and participantsCorresponding authors of research papers submitted in 2014 to 18 BMJ journals.Results3859/12 646 (31%) researchers responded. They worked in 93 countries and varied in research experience. Of these, 1326 (34%) reported their institution had an authorship policy providing criteria for authorship; 2871 (74%) were 'very familiar' with the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors' authorship criteria and 3358 (87%) reported that guidelines were beneficial when preparing manuscripts. Furthermore, 2609 (68%) reported that their use was 'sometimes' or 'frequently' encouraged in their research setting. However, 2859 respondents (74%) reported that they had been involved in a study at least once where someone was added as an author who had not contributed substantially (honorary authorship), and 1305 (34%) where someone was not listed as an author but had contributed substantially (ghost authorship). Only 740 (19%) reported that they had never experienced either honorary or ghost authorship; 1115 (29%) reported that they had experienced both at least once. There was no clear pattern in experience of authorship misappropriation by continent. For their last coauthored article, 2187 (57%) reported that explicit authorship criteria had been used to determine eligibility, and 3088 (80%) felt that the decision made was fair. When institutions frequently encouraged use of authorship guidelines, authorship eligibility was more likely to be discussed early (817 of 1410, 58%) and perceived as fairer (1273 of 1410, 90%) compared with infrequent encouragement (974 of 2449, 40%, and 1891 of 2449, 74%).ConclusionsDespite a high level of awareness of authorship guidelines and criteria, these are not so widely used; more explicit encouragement of their use by institutions may result in more favourable use of guidelines by authors.

Project description:BackgroundImproving facility-based quality for maternal and neonatal care is the key to reducing morbidity and mortality rates in low- and middle-income countries. Recent guidance from WHO and others has produced a large number of indicators to choose from to track quality.ObjectiveTo explore how to translate complex global maternal and neonatal health standards into actionable application at the facility level.MethodsWe applied a two-step process as an example of how the 352 indicators in WHO's 2016 Standards for Improving Quality of Maternal and Newborn Care in Health Facilities might be reduced to only those with the strongest evidence base, associated with outcomes, and actionable by facility managers. We applied Hill criteria and assessed whether indicators were within the control of facility managers. We next conducted a rapid review of supporting literature and applied GRADE analysis, retaining those with scores of 'moderate' or 'high'. To understand the utility and barriers to measuring this limited set of indicators in practice, we undertook a case study of hypothetical measurement application in two districts in Bangladesh, interviewing 25 clinicians, managers, and other stakeholders.ResultsFrom the initial 352 indicators, 56 were retained. The 56 indicators were used as a base for interviews. Respondents emphasized the practical challenges to the use of complex guides and the need for parsimonious and actionable sets of quality indicators.ConclusionsThis work offers one way to move towards a reduced quality indicator set, beginning from current WHO guidance. Despite study limitations, this work provides evidence of the need for reduced and evidence-based sets of quality indicators if guides are to be used to improve quality in practice. We hope that future research will build on and refine our efforts. Measuring quality effectively so that evidence guides and improves practice is the first step to assuring safe maternal and neonatal care.

Dataset Information

Global survey of polymyxin use: A call for international guidelines.

Publications

Global survey of polymyxin use: A call for international guidelines.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets