Laboratory-based versus population-based surveillance of antimicrobial resistance to inform empirical treatment for suspected urinary tract infection in Indonesia

Abstract

Surveillance of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) enables monitoring of trends in AMR prevalence. WHO recommends laboratory-based surveillance to obtain actionable AMR data at local or national level. However, laboratory-based surveillance may lead to overestimation of the prevalence of AMR due to bias. The objective of this study is to assess the difference in resistance prevalence between laboratory-based and population-based surveillance (PBS) among uropathogens in Indonesia. We included all urine samples submitted to the laboratory growing Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae in the laboratory-based surveillance. Population-based surveillance data were collected in a cross-sectional survey of AMR in E. coli and K. pneumoniae isolated from urine samples among consecutive patients with symptoms of UTI, attending outpatient clinics and hospital wards. Data were collected between 1 April 2014 until 31 May 2015. The difference in percentage resistance (95% confidence intervals) between laboratory-and population-based surveillance was calculated for relevant antibiotics. A difference larger than +/-5 percent points was defined as a biased result, precluding laboratory-based surveillance for guiding empirical treatment. We observed high prevalence of AMR ranging between 63.1% (piperacillin-tazobactam) and 85% (ceftriaxone) in laboratory-based surveillance and 41.3% (piperacillin-tazobactam) and 74.2% (ceftriaxone) in population-based surveillance, except for amikacin and meropenem (5.7%/9.8%; 10.8%/5.9%; [laboratory-/population-based surveillance], respectively). Laboratory-based surveillance yielded significantly higher AMR prevalence estimates than population-based surveillance. This difference was much larger when comparing surveillance data from outpatients than from inpatients. All point estimates of the difference between the two surveillance systems were larger than 5 percent points, except for amikacin and a1111111111 a1111111111 a1111111111 a1111111111 a1111111111

Antimicrobial Resistance Among Uropathogens: Surveillance Report From South India

“…In a study from the United States in 2017 across both community and hospital E. coli isolates, AMR prevalence was very low, with maximum resistance observed for cotrimoxazole (32%), while carbapenems had 100 percent sensitivity (Table 5 ) [ 25 ]. Our analysis shows that the prevalence of AMR is alarmingly high in the developing countries as compared to developed nations in concurrence with other authors [ 8 , 10 ].…”

“…World Health Organization's global plan of action on AMR has stressed AMR surveillance across nations as an important strategy for reducing AMR [ 9 ]. Also, it has been shown that the emergence of AMR is proportionately more in the low- and middle-income countries [ 8 , 10 ]. This warrants continuous reporting and surveillance of the emergence of AMR among the uropathogens across regions and nations.…”

Filling the gaps in the global prevalence map of clinical antimicrobial resistance

“…These limitations propagate into our prevalence estimates, and they should thus be interpreted as an approximation of the true prevalence in a country. Future unbiased surveillance will likely require novel approaches, e.g., population-based surveillance ( 33 , 34 ), for which the necessary resources and infrastructure are not yet in place. Our predictive framework provides a means to support the prioritization of investments required for this.…”

Biogeographic assessment of Gorgonian-associated bacteria with antipathogenic Urinary Tract Infections (UTIs) in Karimunjawa Marine National Park, Java Sea, Indonesia

“…In Indonesia, UTI incidence is around 180,000 new cases per year (Sugianli et al 2020). Escherichia coli is the most dominant pathogen acquired nosocomially (Ejrnaes 2011).…”