Government policy interventions to reduce human antimicrobial use: A systematic review and evidence map

Abstract

Background Growing political attention to antimicrobial resistance (AMR) offers a rare opportunity for achieving meaningful action. Many governments have developed national AMR action plans, but most have not yet implemented policy interventions to reduce antimicrobial overuse. A systematic evidence map can support governments in making evidence-informed decisions about implementing programs to reduce AMR, by identifying, describing, and assessing the full range of evaluated government policy options to reduce antimicrobial use in humans. Methods and findings Seven databases were searched from inception to January 28, 2019, (MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, PAIS Index, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and PubMed). We identified studies that (1) clearly described a government policy intervention aimed at reducing human antimicrobial use, and (2) applied a quantitative design to measure the impact. We found 69 unique evaluations of government policy interventions carried out across 4 of the 6 WHO regions. These evaluations included randomized controlled trials ( n = 4), non-randomized controlled trials ( n = 3), controlled before-and-after designs ( n = 7), interrupted time series designs ( n = 25), uncontrolled before-and-after designs ( n = 18), descriptive designs ( n = 10), and cohort designs ( n = 2). From these we identified 17 unique policy options for governments to reduce the human use of antimicrobials. Many studies evaluated public awareness campaigns ( n = 17) and antimicrobial guidelines ( n = 13); however, others offered different policy options such as professional regulation, restricted reimbursement, pay for performance, and prescription requirements. Identifying these policies can inform the development of future policies and evaluations in different contexts and health systems. Limitations of our study include the possible omission of unpublished initiatives, and that policies not evaluated with respect to antimicrobial use have not been captured in this review. Conclusions To our knowledge this is the first study to provide policy makers with synthesized evidence on specific government policy interventions addressing AMR. In the future, governments should ensure that AMR policy interventions are evaluated using rigorous study designs and that study results are published. Protocol registration PROSPERO CRD42017067514 .

Setting the standard: multidisciplinary hallmarks for structural, equitable and tracked antibiotic policy

“…119 Promising access to lucrative markets and using transnational integration to promote precautionary antibiotic policies is an additional tool that was used by the UK in the 1970s, Sweden in the 1990s, and is now being considered by the EU to reduce antibiotic growth promoter and prophylactic antibiotic use in non-European countries. 34 120 However, so far, enactment of proposed measures has been fragmentary 13 and it remains unclear how numerous national and international calls to action with complex interlayered principles of action can be translated into effective change in settings where antibiotic access is lacking and AMR is secondary (at best) to other health concerns. Looking beyond top-down nationstate alignment, by reemphasising municipal and communitybased health initiatives as well as creating new metrics for antibiotic access before prioritising stewardship may be a solution.…”

A framework for improved one health governance and policy making for antimicrobial use

“…The alarm around rising drug resistant infection and scrutiny of governance structures has highlighted overlapping roles and gaps in existing multi-lateral structures and national strategies, and the need to seek consensus on both the magnitude of the problem and national responses 7 12 13. Emphasis on legally binding mechanisms14 is a necessary but insufficient condition to regulate use within global and national limits (ie, caps).…”

“…For example, awareness and advertising around certain animal (food) products or many healthcare interventions that seek to affect behavioural change in prescribing or drug consumption. Quantifying the cost-effectiveness of these measures is challenging, but in clinical and agricultural spheres, there is evidence of their effectiveness 13 24…”

Pharmacological plasticity—How do you hit a moving target?

“…In many ways, we are facing a similar situation with the indiscriminate use of antibiotics, particularly for nutritional livestock or for viral infections, which is actually promoting bacterial resistance mechanisms, such as drug efflux and methylation . Warnings about the global increase in bacterial resistance to antibiotics and the consequent loss of treatment options for many infections are now common and governments and industry have started joint efforts to combat the problem . The situation highlights the importance of taking a multi‐target approach, but also increasing specificity and developing more effective and rapid diagnostic procedures to identify the potential etiological micro‐organism(s).…”