Dataset Information

Comparison of national antimicrobial treatment guidelines, African Union.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To identify and compare antimicrobial treatment guidelines from African Union (AU) Member States.

Methods

We reviewed national government agency and public health institutes' websites and communicated with country or regional focal points to identify existing treatment guidelines from AU Member States. We included guidelines if they contained disease-, syndrome- or pathogen-specific treatment recommendations and if those recommendations included antimicrobial name or class, dosage and therapy duration. The scope of the review was limited to infections and clinical syndromes that often have a bacterial cause. We assessed treatment guidelines for alignment with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria. We compared treatment recommendations for various common bacterial infections or clinical syndromes described across national guidelines and those described in three World Health Organization guidelines.

Findings

We identified 31 treatment guidelines from 20 of the 55 (36%) AU Member States; several countries had more than one treatment guideline that met our inclusion criteria. Fifteen (48%) guidelines from 10 countries have been published or updated since 2015. Methods used to develop the guidelines were not well described. No guidelines were developed according to the GRADE approach. Antimicrobial selection, dosage and duration of recommended therapies varied widely across guidelines for all infections and syndromes.

Conclusion

AU Member States lack antimicrobial treatment guidelines that meet internationally accepted methods and that draw from local evidence about disease burden and antimicrobial susceptibility.

SUBMITTER: Craig J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8722630 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background and objectivesGlobally, a number of countries have developed guidelines that describe the design and conduct of economic evaluations as part of health technology assessment (HTA) or pharmacoeconomic analysis for decision making. The current scoping review was undertaken with an objective to summarize the recommendations made on methods of economic evaluation by the national healthcare economic evaluation (HEE) guidelines.MethodologyA comprehensive search was undertaken in the website repositories of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomic and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) and Guide to Economic Analysis and Research (GEAR), and websites of national HTA agencies and ministries of health of individual countries. All guidelines in the English language were included in this review. Data were extracted with respect to general and methodological characteristics, and a descriptive analysis of recommendations made across the countries was undertaken.ResultsOverall, our review included 31 national HEE guidelines, published between 1997 and August 2020. Nearly half (45%) of the guidelines targeted the evaluation of pharmaceuticals. The nature of the guidelines was either mandatory (31%), recommendatory (42%), or voluntary (16%). There was a substantial consensus among the guidelines on several key principles, including type of economic evaluation (cost-utility analysis), time horizon of the analysis (long enough), health outcome measure (quality-adjusted life-years) and use of sensitivity analyses. The recommendations on study perspective, comparator, discount rate and type of costs to be included (particularly the inclusion of indirect costs) varied widely.ConclusionDespite similarity in the overall processes, variation in several recommendations given by various national HEE guidelines was observed. This is perhaps unsurprising given the differences in the health systems and financing mechanisms, capacity of local researchers, and data availability. This review offers important lessons and a starting point for countries that are planning to develop their own HEE guidelines.

Project description:BackgroundThe increasing threat of bacterial resistance promotes the need for antibiotic stewardship programs to foster responsible antimicrobial use. Therefore, guidelines for prudent use supported by an online stewardship tool (AntibioticScout.ch) were introduced in Switzerland in December 2016. They recommend (with decreasing preference) a first, second or third line antimicrobial for treatment. The objective of this study was to evaluate antimicrobial prescriptions for Swiss calves before (2016) and after (2018) the launch of these guidelines. Cases of calves with pneumonia, diarrhea and otitis from a university hospital and eight private practices in Switzerland were included. Data on anamnesis, clinical findings, diagnostic work-up and treatment were collected. Type and percentages [95% confidence interval] of antimicrobial prescriptions were compared between 2016 and 2018.ResultsOf the total number of calves, 88.2% [85.4-90.6] in 2016 (n = 625) and 88.4% [85.7-90.7] in 2018 (n = 655) were treated with antibiotics. The use of highest priority critically important antimicrobials (HPCIAs) decreased from 52.7% [48.6-56.9] in 2016 to 38.0% [34.2-41.9] in 2018; this decrease was found at the university hospital and in private practice and in cases with pneumonia and diarrhea. Particularly the use of fluoroquinolones decreased (2016: 43.1% [39.2-47.2]; 2018: 31.1% [27.6-34.8]). Overall, the number of first line treatments increased from 12.8% [10.4-15.6] in 2016 to 20.2% [17.3-23.4] in 2018. In cases of pneumonia, first line treatments increased (2016: 15.3% [11.6-19.9]; 2018: 26.5% [21.8-31.9]) and third line treatments decreased (2016: 43.5% [38.0-49.3]; 2018: 27.9% [23.1-33.3]); this was seen at the university hospital, whereas in private practice only a decrease of third line treatments was observed. In cases of diarrhea, more second line at the expense of unlisted antimicrobials were prescribed at the university hospital in 2018. Antimicrobial treatment of calves with otitis did not change from 2016 to 2018.ConclusionsAfter the introduction of AntibioticScout.ch, more prudent use was observed in the treatment of calves with pneumonia and diarrhea as less HPCIAs, particularly fluoroquinolones, and more first line antimicrobials were prescribed. However, the overall frequency of antimicrobial treatment did not change and the use of HPCIAs was still common in 2018, especially in private practices. Therefore, further antimicrobial stewardship activities are necessary.