Search

To investigate the drivers for infection management and antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) across high-infection-risk surgical pathways. A qualitative study—ethnographic observation of clinical practices, patient case studies, and face-to-face interviews with healthcare professionals (HCPs) and patients—was conducted across cardiovascular and thoracic and gastrointestinal surgical pathways in South Africa (SA) and India. Aided by Nvivo 11 software, data were coded and analysed until saturation was reached. The multiple modes of enquiry enabled cross-validation and triangulation of findings. Between July 2018 and August 2019, data were gathered from 190 hours of non-participant observations (138 India, 72 SA), interviews with HCPs (44 India, 61 SA), patients (six India, eight SA), and case studies (four India, two SA). Across the surgical pathway, multiple barriers impede effective infection management and AMS. The existing implicit roles of HCPs (including nurses and senior surgeons) are overlooked as interventions target junior doctors, bypassing the opportunity for integrating infection-related care across the surgical team. Critically, the ownership of decisions remains with the operating surgeons, and entrenched hierarchies restrict the inclusion of other HCPs in decision-making. The structural foundations to enable staff to change their behaviours and participate in infection-related surgical care are lacking. Identifying the implicit existing HCP roles in infection management is critical and will facilitate the development of effective and transparent processes across the surgical team for optimized care. Applying a framework approach that includes nurse leadership, empowering pharmacists and engaging surgical leads, is essential for integrated AMS and infection-related care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Infections due to resistant bacteria are associated with severe illness, increased risk for complications, hospital admissions, and higher mortality. Inappropriate use of antibiotics, which contributes to increased antibiotic resistance (ABR), is common in healthcare settings across the globe. In Cameroon, antibiotics have been reported as high as 45-70% of prescriptions. We sought to investigate the knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions regarding appropriate antibiotic use and ABR of medical doctors practicing in tertiary hospitals in Yaoundé, Cameroon.Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional survey using a 54-item self-administered questionnaire sent via email to medical doctors working in the four major tertiary hospitals of Yaoundé. The questionnaire recorded socio-demographics, perceptions on antibiotic use and ABR, sources and usefulness of education on ABR, and clinical scenarios to appraise knowledge.Results: A total of 98/206 (48%) doctors responded. Years of experience ranged between 1 and 17 years. Most participants agreed that ABR is a problem nationwide (93%) and antibiotics are overused (96%), but only one third (32%) thought that ABR was a problem in their wards. Most respondents (65%) were confident that they use antibiotics appropriately. We found a mean knowledge score of 56% (± 14), with prescribers not influenced by patient-exerted pressure for antibiotic prescribing scoring better compared to those influenced by patients (67% vs 53%, p = 0.01). Overall, most participants (99%) expressed interest for further education on both appropriate antibiotic use and ABR.Conclusion: Confidence of prescribers in their ability to appropriately use antibiotics conflicts with the low level of knowledge on antibiotic use in this group of doctors. Moreover, the opinion of the majority, that ABR is not a problem in their own backyard is in keeping with similar studies in other countries and is of significant concern. Introduction of formal antibiotic stewardship programmes in Cameroon may be a useful intervention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The WHO Model List of Essential Medicines (EML) prioritizes medicines that have significant global public health value. The EML can also deliver important messages on appropriate medicine use. Since 2017, in response to the growing challenge of antimicrobial resistance, antibiotics on the EML have been reviewed and categorized into three groups: Access, Watch, and Reserve, leading to a new categorization called AWaRe. These categories were developed taking into account the impact of different antibiotics and classes on antimicrobial resistance and the implications for their appropriate use. The 2023 AWaRe classification provides empirical guidance on 41 essential antibiotics for over 30 clinical infections targeting both the primary health care and hospital facility setting. A further 257 antibiotics not included on the EML have been allocated an AWaRe group for stewardship and monitoring purposes. This article describes the development of AWaRe, focussing on the clinical evidence base that guided the selection of Access, Watch, or Reserve antibiotics as first and second choices for each infection. The overarching objective was to offer a tool for optimizing the quality of global antibiotic prescribing and reduce inappropriate use by encouraging the use of Access antibiotics (or no antibiotics) where appropriate. This clinical evidence evaluation and subsequent EML recommendations are the basis for the AWaRe antibiotic book and related smartphone applications. By providing guidance on antibiotic prioritization, AWaRe aims to facilitate the revision of national lists of essential medicines, update national prescribing guidelines, and supervise antibiotic use. Adherence to AWaRe would extend the effectiveness of current antibiotics while helping countries expand access to these life-saving medicines for the benefit of current and future patients, health professionals, and the environment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The link between healthcare worker (HCW) communication, teamwork and patient safety is well-established. Infection prevention and control (IPC) and antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) require multidisciplinary teamwork and communication. We conducted a scoping review of published evidence on effective mechanisms of HCW team communication in hospitals with the intention of transferring and tailoring learning to IPC and AMS team communication. PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and CINAHL were searched for studies that investigated HCW team communication across in-hospital patient pathways. Studies published between 2000 and 2021 that provided evidence on/or described the effect of communication on team and patient outcomes in hospital were included. Through a process of inductive qualitative content analysis, key themes in the included studies were identified. Of 537 studies identified, 53 (from high-income countries) were included in the data extraction. Fifty one percent (27/53) of studies were conducted in high acuity settings e.g., intensive care units. Standardizing or structuring the content and/or process of team communication was the most common goal of interventions (34/53, 64%). The key outcome measures were either team communication focused (25/34,74%) or patient and process outcome focused (8/34, 24%), such as reduced length of mechanical ventilation days, length of hospital stay, and shorter empiric antibiotic duration. Four studies (4/53, 8%) associated improved communication with positive IPC and AMS outcome measures. Mixed method intervention studies primarily facilitated collaborative input from HCWs and applied structures to standardize the content of patient care discussions, whereas observational studies describe component of team communication. A communication strategy that formalizes input from multidisciplinary team members can lead to optimized and consistent clinical discussion including in IPC and AMS-related care. Although we were unable to assess the effectiveness of interventions, the existing evidence suggests that optimizing team communication can have a positive effect on infection-related patient outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: While a large proportion of people with HIV (PWH) have experienced SARS‐CoV‐2 infections, there is uncertainty about the role of HIV disease severity on COVID‐19 outcomes, especially in lower‐income settings. We studied the association of mortality with characteristics of HIV severity and management, and vaccination, among adult PWH. Methods: We analysed observational cohort data on all PWH aged ≥15 years experiencing a diagnosed SARS‐CoV‐2 infection (until March 2022), who accessed public sector healthcare in the Western Cape province of South Africa. Logistic regression was used to study the association of mortality with evidence of antiretroviral therapy (ART) collection, time since first HIV evidence, CD4 cell count, viral load (among those with evidence of ART collection) and COVID‐19 vaccination, adjusting for demographic characteristics, comorbidities, admission pressure, location and time period. Results: Mortality occurred in 5.7% (95% CI: 5.3,6.0) of 17,831 first‐diagnosed infections. Higher mortality was associated with lower recent CD4, no evidence of ART collection, high or unknown recent viral load and recent first HIV evidence, differentially by age. Vaccination was protective. The burden of comorbidities was high, and tuberculosis (especially more recent episodes of tuberculosis), chronic kidney disease, diabetes and hypertension were associated with higher mortality, more strongly in younger adults. Conclusions: Mortality was strongly associated with suboptimal HIV control, and the prevalence of these risk factors increased in later COVID‐19 waves. It remains a public health priority to ensure PWH are on suppressive ART and vaccinated, and manage any disruptions in care that occurred during the pandemic. The diagnosis and management of comorbidities, including for tuberculosis, should be optimized. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The irrational use of antibiotics is a leading contributor to antibiotic resistance. Antibiotic stewardship (AS) interventions predominantly focus on prescribers. This study investigated the influence and participation of inpatients in infection‐related care, including antibiotic decision‐making, within and across two tertiary hospitals in South Africa (Cape Town) and India (Kerala). Methods: Through ethnographic enquiry of clinical practice in surgical pathways, including direct nonparticipant observation of clinical practices, healthcare worker (HCW), patient and carer interactions in surgical ward rounds and face‐to‐face interviews with participants (HCWs and patients), we sought to capture the implicit and explicit influence that patients and carers have in infection‐related care. Field notes and interview transcripts were thematically coded, aided by NVivo 12® Pro software. Results: Whilst observational data revealed the nuanced roles that patients/carers play in antibiotic decision‐making, HCWs did not recognize these roles. Patients and carers, though invested in patient care, are not routinely involved, nor are they aware of the opportunities for engagement in infection‐related decision‐making. Patients associated clinical improvement with antibiotic use and did not consider hospitalization to be associated with infection acquisition or transmission, highlighting a lack of understanding of the threat of infection and antibiotic resistance. Patients' economic and cultural positionalities may influence their infection‐related behaviours. In the study site in India, cultural norms mean that carers play widespread but unrecognized roles in inpatient care, participating in infection prevention activities. Conclusion: For patients to have a valuable role in AS and make informed decisions regarding their infection‐related care, a mutual understanding of their role in this process among HCWs and patients is crucial. The observed differences between the two study sites indicate the critical need for understanding and addressing the contextual drivers that impact effective patient‐centred healthcare delivery. Patient or Public Contribution: Ethnographic observations and interviews conducted in this study involved patients as participants. Patients were recruited for interviews after obtaining signed informed consent forms. Patients' identities were completely anonymized when presenting the study findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is still a paucity of evidence on the outcomes of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) among people living with human immunodeficiency virus (PWH) and those co-infected with tuberculosis (TB), particularly in areas where these conditions are common. We describe the clinical features, laboratory findings and outcome of hospitalised PWH and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-uninfected COVID-19 patients as well as those co-infected with tuberculosis (TB).Methods: We conducted a multicentre cohort study across three hospitals in Cape Town, South Africa. All adults requiring hospitalisation with confirmed COVID-19 pneumonia from March to July 2020 were analysed.Results: PWH comprised 270 (19%) of 1434 admissions. There were 47 patients with active tuberculosis (3.3%), of whom 29 (62%) were PWH. Three-hundred and seventy-three patients (26%) died. The mortality in PWH (n = 71, 26%) and HIV-uninfected patients (n = 296, 25%) was comparable. In patients with TB, PWH had a higher mortality than HIV-uninfected patients (n = 11, 38% vs n = 3, 20%; p = 0.001). In multivariable survival analysis a higher risk of death was associated with older age (Adjusted Hazard Ratio (AHR) 1.03 95%CI 1.02-1.03, p < 0.001), male sex (AHR1.38 (95%CI 1.12-1.72, p = 0.003) and being "overweight or obese" (AHR 1.30 95%CI 1.03-1.61 p = 0.024). HIV (AHR 1.28 95%CI 0.95-1.72, p 0.11) and active TB (AHR 1.50 95%CI 0.84-2.67, p = 0.17) were not independently associated with increased risk of COVID-19 death. Risk factors for inpatient mortality in PWH included CD4 cell count < 200 cells/mm3, higher admission oxygen requirements, absolute white cell counts, neutrophil/lymphocyte ratios, C-reactive protein, and creatinine levels.Conclusion: In a population with high prevalence of HIV and TB, being overweight/obese was associated with increased risk of mortality in COVID-19 hospital admissions, emphasising the need for public health interventions in this patient population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVES: The objective was to compare COVID‐19 outcomes in the Omicron‐driven fourth wave with prior waves in the Western Cape, assess the contribution of undiagnosed prior infection to differences in outcomes in a context of high seroprevalence due to prior infection and determine whether protection against severe disease conferred by prior infection and/or vaccination was maintained. METHODS: In this cohort study, we included public sector patients aged ≥20 years with a laboratory‐confirmed COVID‐19 diagnosis between 14 November and 11 December 2021 (wave four) and equivalent prior wave periods. We compared the risk between waves of the following outcomes using Cox regression: death, severe hospitalisation or death and any hospitalisation or death (all ≤14 days after diagnosis) adjusted for age, sex, comorbidities, geography, vaccination and prior infection. RESULTS: We included 5144 patients from wave four and 11,609 from prior waves. The risk of all outcomes was lower in wave four compared to the Delta‐driven wave three (adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) [95% confidence interval (CI)] for death 0.27 [0.19; 0.38]. Risk reduction was lower when adjusting for vaccination and prior diagnosed infection (aHR: 0.41, 95% CI: 0.29; 0.59) and reduced further when accounting for unascertained prior infections (aHR: 0.72). Vaccine protection was maintained in wave four (aHR for outcome of death: 0.24; 95% CI: 0.10; 0.58). CONCLUSIONS: In the Omicron‐driven wave, severe COVID‐19 outcomes were reduced mostly due to protection conferred by prior infection and/or vaccination, but intrinsically reduced virulence may account for a modest reduction in risk of severe hospitalisation or death compared to the Delta‐driven wave. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• The diagnostic gap hides the true extent of antimicrobial resistance in Africa. • Conventional laboratory diagnostics are unlikely to bridge this gap. • Various point-of-care assays for antimicrobial resistance applications are in development. • Implementation strategies for point-of-care assays are needed to close the diagnostic gap. Sub-Saharan African (SSA) countries are severely impacted by antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Due to gaps in access to diagnostics in SSA, the true extent of AMR remains unknown. This diagnostic gap affects patient management and leads to significant antimicrobial overuse. This review explores how point-of-care (POC) testing for pathogen identification and AMR may be used to close the diagnostic gap in SSA countries. A narrative review exploring current clinical practice and novel developments in the field of POC testing for infectious diseases and AMR. POC assays for identification of various pathogens have been successfully rolled out in SSA countries. While implementation studies have mostly highlighted impressive test performance of POC assays, there is limited data on the impact of implementation on clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness. We did not encounter local studies of host-directed POC assays relevant to AMR. Novel POC assays using real-time polymerase chain reaction, isothermal amplification, microfluidics, and other technologies are in various stages of development. Available literature shows that POC testing for AMR applications is implementable in SSA and holds the potential to reduce the diagnostic gap. Implementation will require effective regulatory pathways, incorporation of POC testing in clinical and laboratory guidelines, and adequate value capture in existing health financing models. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• The COVID-19 pandemic has helped challenge the usual way of doing research. • A prolonged on-site presence at the early stage of projects is critical. • Research should rely on a capacity-building strategy to provide local skills. • Funding should be proportionate to the cost of resources and gaps in each low middle income countries setting. This article summarizes the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic, on an international project to tackle antimicrobial resistance (AMR). The research leadership and process, the access to data, and stakeholders were deeply disrupted by the national and international response to the pandemic, including the interruption of healthcare delivery, lockdowns, and quarantines. The key principles to deliver the research through the pandemic were mainly the high degree of interdisciplinary engagement with integrated teams, and equitable partnership across sites with capacity building and leadership training. The level of preexisting collaboration and partnership were also keys to sustaining connections and involvements throughout the pandemic. The pandemic offered opportunities for realigning research priorities. Flexibility in funding timelines and projects inputs are required to accommodate variance introduced by external factors. The current models for research collaboration and funding need to be critically evaluated and redesigned to retain the innovation that was shown to be successful through this pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Antibiotics are often prescribed inappropriately, either when they are not necessary or with an unnecessarily broad spectrum of activity. AWaRe (AccessWatchReserve) is a system developed by WHO to classify antibiotics based on their spectrum of activity and potential for favouring the development of antibiotic resistance (Access: narrow spectrum/low potential for resistance; Watch: broader spectrum/higher potential for resistance; Reserve: last resort antibiotics to use very selectively). The WHO target is that by 2023, at least 60% of prescribed antibiotics globally should be from the Access category. The WHO AWaRe Book aims to improve empiric antibiotic prescribing by providing simple guidance for common infections based on the principles of AWaRe in alignment with the Model Lists of Essential Medicines for adults and children. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]