Dataset Information

Antibiotic prescribing in patients with COVID-19: rapid review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The proportion of patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 that are prescribed antibiotics is uncertain, and may contribute to patient harm and global antibiotic resistance.

Objective

The aim was to estimate the prevalence and associated factors of antibiotic prescribing in patients with COVID-19.

Data sources

We searched MEDLINE, OVID Epub and EMBASE for published literature on human subjects in English up to June 9 2020.

Study eligibility criteria

We included randomized controlled trials; cohort studies; case series with ≥10 patients; and experimental or observational design that evaluated antibiotic prescribing.

Participants

The study participants were patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, across all healthcare settings (hospital and community) and age groups (paediatric and adult).

Methods

The main outcome of interest was proportion of COVID-19 patients prescribed an antibiotic, stratified by geographical region, severity of illness and age. We pooled proportion data using random effects meta-analysis.

Results

We screened 7469 studies, from which 154 were included in the final analysis. Antibiotic data were available from 30 623 patients. The prevalence of antibiotic prescribing was 74.6% (95% CI 68.3-80.0%). On univariable meta-regression, antibiotic prescribing was lower in children (prescribing prevalence odds ratio (OR) 0.10, 95% CI 0.03-0.33) compared with adults. Antibiotic prescribing was higher with increasing patient age (OR 1.45 per 10 year increase, 95% CI 1.18-1.77) and higher with increasing proportion of patients requiring mechanical ventilation (OR 1.33 per 10% increase, 95% CI 1.15-1.54). Estimated bacterial co-infection was 8.6% (95% CI 4.7-15.2%) from 31 studies.

Conclusions

Three-quarters of patients with COVID-19 receive antibiotics, prescribing is significantly higher than the estimated prevalence of bacterial co-infection. Unnecessary antibiotic use is likely to be high in patients with COVID-19.

SUBMITTER: Langford BJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7785281 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCOVID-19 and antimicrobial resistance (AMR) are two intersecting global public health crises.ObjectiveWe aimed to describe the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on AMR across health care settings.Data sourceA search was conducted in December 2021 in WHO COVID-19 Research Database with forward citation searching up to June 2022.Study eligibilityStudies evaluating the impact of COVID-19 on AMR in any population were included and influencing factors were extracted. Reporting of enhanced infection prevention and control and/or antimicrobial stewardship programs was noted.MethodsPooling was done separately for Gram-negative and Gram-positive organisms. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed.ResultsOf 6036 studies screened, 28 were included and 23 provided sufficient data for meta-analysis. The majority of studies focused on hospital settings (n = 25, 89%). The COVID-19 pandemic was not associated with a change in the incidence density (incidence rate ratio 0.99, 95% CI: 0.67-1.47) or proportion (risk ratio 0.91, 95% CI: 0.55-1.49) of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus or vancomycin-resistant enterococci cases. A non-statistically significant increase was noted for resistant Gram-negative organisms (i.e. extended-spectrum beta-lactamase, carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales, carbapenem or multi-drug resistant or carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa or Acinetobacter baumannii, incidence rate ratio 1.64, 95% CI: 0.92-2.92; risk ratio 1.08, 95% CI: 0.91-1.29). The absence of reported enhanced infection prevention and control and/or antimicrobial stewardship programs initiatives was associated with an increase in gram-negative AMR (risk ratio 1.11, 95% CI: 1.03-1.20). However, a test for subgroup differences showed no statistically significant difference between the presence and absence of these initiatives (p 0.40).ConclusionThe COVID-19 pandemic may have hastened the emergence and transmission of AMR, particularly for Gram-negative organisms in hospital settings. But there is considerable heterogeneity in both the AMR metrics used and the rate of resistance reported across studies. These findings reinforce the need for strengthened infection prevention, antimicrobial stewardship, and AMR surveillance in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Project description:BackgroundCOVID-19 and antimicrobial resistance (AMR) are two intersecting public health crises. Antimicrobial overuse in patients with COVID-19 threatens to worsen AMR. Guidelines are fundamental in encouraging antimicrobial stewardship. We sought to assess the quality of antibiotic prescribing guidelines and recommendations in the context of COVID-19, and whether they incorporate principles of antimicrobial stewardship.MethodsWe performed a systematic survey which included a search using the concepts "antibiotic/antimicrobial" up to November 15, 2022 of the eCOVID-19 living map of recommendations (RecMap) which aggregates guidelines across a range of international sources and all languages. Guidelines providing explicit recommendations regarding antibacterial use in COVID-19 were eligible for inclusion. Guideline and recommendation quality were assessed using the AGREE II and AGREE-REX instruments, respectively. We extracted guideline characteristics including panel representation and the presence or absence of explicit statements related to antimicrobial stewardship (i.e., judicious antibiotic use, antimicrobial resistance or adverse effects as a consequence of antibiotic use). We used logistic regression to evaluate the relationship between guideline characteristics including quality and incorporation of antimicrobial stewardship principles. Protocol registration (OSF): https://osf.io/4pgtc.FindingsTwenty-eight guidelines with 63 antibiotic prescribing recommendations were included. Recommendations focused on antibiotic initiation (n = 52, 83%) and less commonly antibiotic selection (n = 13, 21%), and duration of therapy (n = 15, 24%). Guideline and recommendation quality varied widely. Twenty (71%) guidelines incorporated at least one concept relating to antimicrobial stewardship. Including infectious diseases expertise on the guideline panel (OR 9.44, 97.5% CI: 1.09-81.59) and AGREE-REX score (OR 3.26, 97.5% CI: 1.14-9.31 per 10% increase in overall score) were associated with a higher odds of guidelines addressing antimicrobial stewardship.InterpretationThere is an opportunity to improve antibiotic prescribing guidelines in terms of both quality and incorporation of antimicrobial stewardship principles. These findings can help guideline developers better address antibiotic stewardship in future recommendations beyond COVID-19.FundingThis project was funded by Michael G. DeGroote Cochrane Canada and McMaster GRADE centres.