Background In hospital settings, restriction of selected classes of antibiotics is usually believed to contribute to containment of resistance development. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the effect of restricting the use of specific antibiotic classes on the prevalence of resistant bacterial pathogens. Methods We conducted a systematic literature search in Embase and PubMed/OVID MEDLINE. We included studies until June 4, 2020 in which a restrictive antibiotic policy was applied and prevalence of resistance and use of antibiotics were reported. We calculated the overall effect of antimicrobial resistance between post-intervention versus pre-intervention periods using pooled odds ratios (OR) from a mixed-effects model. We stratified meta-analysis by antibiotic-pathogen combinations. We assessed heterogeneity between studies using the I 2 statistic and sources of heterogeneity using meta-regression. Results We included fifteen individual studies with an overall low quality of evidence. In meta-analysis, significant reductions in resistance were only observed with non-fermenters after restricting fluoroquinolones (OR=0·77, 95%CI=0·62–0·97) and piperacillin-tazobactam (OR=0·81, 95%CI=0·72–0·92). High degrees of heterogeneity were observed with studies restricting carbapenem (Enterobacterales, I 2=70·8%; non-fermenters, I 2=81·9%), third-generation cephalosporins (non-fermenters, I 2=63·3%) and fluoroquiolones (non-fermenters, I 2=64·0%). Results were comparable when excluding studies with fewer than 50 bacteria. There was no evidence of publication bias for any of the antibiotic-pathogen combinations. Conclusions We could not confirm that restricting carbapenems or third-generation cephalosporins leads to decrease in prevalence of antibiotic resistance among Enterobacterales, non-fermenters or Gram-positive bacteria in hospitalized patients. Nevertheless, reducing fluoroquinolone and piperacilline-tazobactam use may decrease resistance in non-fermenters.
BackgroundThe increase of antimicrobial resistance, mainly due to increased antibiotic use, is worrying. Preliminary evidence suggests that antibiotic use differs across ethnic groups in the Netherlands, with higher use in people of non-Dutch origin. We aimed to determine whether appropriate knowledge and use of antibiotics differ by ethnicity and whether knowledge on antibiotics is associated with antibiotic use.MethodsWe performed a cross-sectional study analyzing baseline data (2011–2015) from a population-based cohort (HELIUS study), which were linked to data from a health insurance register. We included 21,617 HELIUS participants of South-Asian Surinamese, African-Surinamese, Turkish, Moroccan, Ghanaian, and Dutch origin. Fifteen thousand seven participants had available prescription data from the Achmea Health Data-base (AHD) in the year prior to their HELIUS study visit. Participants were asked five questions on antibiotic treatment during influenza-like illness, pneumonia, fever, sore throat and bronchitis, from which higher versus lower antibiotic knowledge level was determined. Number of antibiotic prescriptions in the year prior to the HELIUS study visit was used to determine antibiotic use.ResultsThe percentage of individuals with a higher level of antibiotic knowledge was lower among all ethnic minority groups (range 57 to 70%) compared to Dutch (80%). After correcting for baseline characteristics, including medical conditions, first-generation African Surinamese and Turkish migrants received a significantly lower number of antibiotic prescriptions compared to individuals of Dutch origin. Only second-generation Ghanaian participants received more prescriptions compared to Dutch participants (aIRR 2.09, 95%CI 1.06 to 4.12). Higher level of antibiotic knowledge was not significantly associated with the number of prescriptions (IRR 0.92, 95%CI 0.85 to 1.00).ConclusionsLevels of antibiotic knowledge varied between ethnic groups, but a lower level of antibiotic knowledge did not correspond with a higher number of antibiotic prescriptions.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.