Purpose This meta-analysis aims to find out the impact of pharmacists on clinical outcomes of antimicrobial stewardship (AMS). Method Articles were searched and analyzed based on quality assessed through the JSM quality assessment tool to filter articles with a low level of bias. Two thousand three hundred sixty articles were reviewed for initial screening and 28 articles were included for critical analysis. Statistical analysis used to risk ratio (RR) and standard mean differences calculated using Review manager 5.4. Confidence intervals (CI 95%) were calculated using the fixed-effect model. The I2 statistic assessed heterogeneity. A random-effect model performed in the case of statistical heterogeneity, subgroup and sensitivity analyses. The primary outcome is mortality and inappropriateness, whereas the secondary outcome is cost, readmission, length of stay, consumption and duration of therapy. Result A detailed review and analysis of 28 AMSs programs led by pharmacists showed low inappropriateness with pharmacist versus without pharmacist RR = 0.36 with 95% CI of (0.32 to 0.39) and mortality RR is 0.68 with 95% CI of 0.59 to 0.79. Secondary outcomes such as consumption, length of stay, duration of therapy and cost are standard mean difference of −1.61 with 95% CI (−1.72 to −1.50), −0.58 with 95% CI (−0.62 to −0.53), −0.95 with 95% CI (−1.01 to −0.89) and −0.99 with 95% CI (−1.12 to −0.86), respectively, whereas for 30 days readmission is RR = 0.81 with 95% CI (0.70 to 0.93). Conclusion AMS with pharmacist effectively reduces mortality, inappropriateness, cost, length of stay, duration of treatment, consumption of antimicrobials and the return rate to hospital. So it is suggested pharmacists should lead or play a vital role in antimicrobial stewardship programs to get better outcomes.
Purpose This meta-analysis aims to evaluate inappropriate antibiotic prescribing in the Gulf region and determine the effect of pharmacist-led antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) programmes on reducing inappropriateness. Method Articles were searched, analysed, and quality assessed through the risk of bias (ROB) quality assessment tool to select articles with a low level of bias. In step 1, 515 articles were searched, in step 2, 2360 articles were searched, and ultimately 32 articles were included by critical analysis. Statistical analysis used to determine risk ratio and standard mean differences were calculated using Review manager 5.4; 95% confidence intervals were calculated using the fixed-effect model. The I 2 statistic assessed heterogeneity. In statistical heterogeneity, subgroup and sensitivity analyses, a random effect model was performed. The α threshold was 0.05. The primary outcome was inappropriateness in antibiotic prescribing in the Gulf region and reduction of inappropriateness through AMS. Result Detailed review and analysis of 18 studies of inappropriate antibiotic prescribing in the Gulf region showed the risk of inappropriateness was 43 669/100 846=43.3% (pooled RR 1.31, 95% CI 1.30 to 1.32). Test with overall effect was 58.87; in the second step 28 AMS programmes led by pharmacists showed reduced inappropriateness in AMS with pharmacist versus pre-AMS without pharmacist (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.39). Conclusion Inappropriate antibiotic prescribing in the Gulf region is alarming and needs to be addressed through pharmacist-led AMS programmes.
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.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.