STROBE-AMS: recommendations to optimise reporting of epidemiological studies on antimicrobial resistance and informing improvement in antimicrobial stewardship

Tacconelli, Evelina; Cataldo, Maria Adriana; Paul, Mical; Leibovici, Leonard; Kluytmans, Jan; Schröder, Wiebke; Foschi, Federico; Angelis, Giulia De; Waure, Chiara de; Cadeddu, Chiara; Mutters, Nico T.; Gastmeier, Petra; Cookson, Barry

doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010134

Cited by 66 publications

(66 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In this setting, a majority of the patients carrying 'resistant' bacteria will come from the surrounding health-care region [17,45]. The quality of evidence of ASP effects on resistance is still low [8,46]. To improve studies specifically looking at correlating antimicrobial use and resistance development, a Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) tool was developed (STROBE-AMS) [46].…”

Section: Microbiological Outcome Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The quality of evidence of ASP effects on resistance is still low [8,46]. To improve studies specifically looking at correlating antimicrobial use and resistance development, a Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) tool was developed (STROBE-AMS) [46]. Concerning SDD/SOD, there is still discussion regarding possible resistance development and it is therefore highly advisable to monitor possible resistance development when implementing such an intervention [47].…”

Section: Microbiological Outcome Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Measuring the impact of antimicrobial stewardship programs

Dik

Hendrix

Poelman

et al. 2016

Expert Review of Anti-infective Therapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs (ASPs) are being implemented worldwide to optimize antimicrobial therapy, and thereby improve patient safety and quality of care. Additionally, this should counteract resistance development. It is, however, vital that correct and timely diagnostics are performed in parallel, and that an institution runs a well-organized infection prevention program. Currently, there is no clear consensus on which interventions an ASP should comprise. Indeed this depends on the institution, the region, and the patient population that is served. Different interventions will lead to different effects. Therefore, adequate evaluations, both clinically and financially, are crucial. Here, we provide a general overview of, and perspective on different intervention strategies and methods to evaluate these ASP programs, covering before mentioned topics. This should lead to a more consistent approach in evaluating these programs, making it easier to compare different interventions and studies with each other and ultimately improve infection and patient management. ARTICLE HISTORY

show abstract

Section: Microbiological Outcome Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Microbiological Outcome Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring the impact of antimicrobial stewardship programs

Dik

Hendrix

Poelman

et al. 2016

Expert Review of Anti-infective Therapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There is evidence that successful implementation of stewardship programs in hospitals has improved antibiotic prescribing practices [76][77][78]. A number of studies that looked at the impact of antibiotic stewardship programs indicated that in spite of most studies having differing assessment tools, challenges with quality of evidence, there is consensus that it holds great promise in improving rational antibiotic prescriptions [79][80][81][82]. Majority of outcomes studies showed positive improvement in both clinical and economic outcomes for patients [76,83].…”

Section: > N = 5079mentioning

confidence: 99%

Empirical Antibiotic Prescription Pattern among Patients in a Nigerian Tertiary Hospital, is There Evidence of Irrationality?

Paul

Abdulmalik

2019

JAMMR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Resistance to antibiotics is spreading rapidly around the world with its associated morbidity and mortality. Infections are becoming increasingly difficult to treat resulting in increased cost of medical care. In low income countries with high infectious disease burden, antibiotic resistance is reported to be accelerated by irrational prescriptions in health facilities. In the absence of adequate resources, many clinicians engage in empirical antibiotic prescriptions some of which their appropriateness is questionable. There is need for laboratory evidence to justify empirical antibiotic use in the light of increasing resistance to commonly prescribed antibiotics. Aims: This study aims to determine empirical antibiotic prescription pattern and to determine rationality using resistance profile of common bacterial isolates in hospitals. Methods: Antibiotic prescriptions in the NHIS department and antibiogram records were obtained from pharmacy and laboratory records respectively. Analysis was carried out using descriptive statistics and comparison between antibiotics prescribed and their respective resistance pattern were compared to determine rationality. Results and Discussion: The Penicillins and Quinolones were the most prescribed class of antibiotics and resistance range between 30 – 90% and 3 – 23% respectively. Resistance to other antibiotics was high thus making empirical prescriptions irrational in most of the cases. These findings have been consistently reported in several studies so widespread empirical antibiotic prescriptions are not in tandem with principles of rational drug use. Conclusion: Antibiotic resistance is common among hospital isolates, so there is need to emphasize that prescriptions be based on laboratory evidence of microbial sensitivity.

show abstract

“…Subsequently, several extensions to STROBE were published, some including authors involved in the original Statement, to provide more nuanced and tailored guidance. [3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15] In principal, these efforts are valuable, but inconsistencies may arise because extension production is not coordinated, and there is no clear guidance on their creation.…”

Section: To the Editormentioning

confidence: 99%