Synthesizing evidence to guide the design and implementation of effective strategies for discontinuing postoperative antibiotic prophylaxis in surgical settings: an umbrella review post-WHO 2018 recommendations.

IF 6.3 4区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
George Msema Bwire, Renatus B Magati, Hafidhi H Ntissi, Tusaligwe Mbilinyi, Martine A Manguzu, Goodluck G Nyondo, Belinda J Njiro, Lilian B Nkinda, Castory G Munishi, Obadia Nyongole, Pacifique Ndayishimiye, Mtebe V Majigo
{"title":"Synthesizing evidence to guide the design and implementation of effective strategies for discontinuing postoperative antibiotic prophylaxis in surgical settings: an umbrella review post-WHO 2018 recommendations.","authors":"George Msema Bwire, Renatus B Magati, Hafidhi H Ntissi, Tusaligwe Mbilinyi, Martine A Manguzu, Goodluck G Nyondo, Belinda J Njiro, Lilian B Nkinda, Castory G Munishi, Obadia Nyongole, Pacifique Ndayishimiye, Mtebe V Majigo","doi":"10.1186/s13643-024-02750-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Postoperative antibiotic prophylaxis (PAP) involves using antibiotics after surgery to prevent surgical site infections (SSIs). However, studies have shown that PAP offers no additional benefits compared to discontinuation after surgical incision closure, prompting its de-implementation to prevent unnecessary antibiotic use that may contribute to antibiotic resistance. We conducted this review to synthesize evidence for guiding the design and implementation of effective strategies for discontinuing PAP practice and optimizing antibiotic use in surgical settings.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This umbrella review searched for articles from PubMed/MEDLINE and Scopus, focusing on reviews conducted on human subjects on PAP to prevent SSIs, published in English language from 2019 to 5th July 2024. This review followed guidelines from PRISMA-P and PRIOR. The risk of bias (methodological quality) was assessed using AMSTAR-2. The pooled risk ratio (RR) was estimated using a fixed-effects model (Mantel-Haenszel method), while I<sup>2</sup> was used to assess the heterogeneity between reviews. This review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42024566124).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In our umbrella review, we screened 1156 articles, with 28 review articles found eligible for final analysis, involving over 457 primary studies. About 80,483 patients were involved in 9 meta-analysis reviews, which were used to estimate the pooled RR. We found no significant benefits to patients from continuing PAP beyond 24-h post-surgery compared to immediate discontinuation, RR: 1.07 (95% CI: 0.97-1.17, I<sup>2</sup>: 25%, p-value: 0.22). Strategies such as regularly assessing and refining guidelines to fit specific surgical settings and patients' characteristics, multidisciplinary collaboration, availability of resources needed for best practices, education and training healthcare workers on SSI prevention and antibiotic stewardship, and patient education in SSI prevention and proper antibiotic use were recommended to improve best practices in surgical settings.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Prolonging antibiotic prophylaxis beyond 24-h post-surgery did not show significant protective benefits against SSIs. Our findings support the 2018 WHO recommendation for the immediate discontinuation of PAP following surgical incision closure in clean and clean-contaminated procedures. Further de-implementation research studies are needed to guide the effective discontinuation of PAP practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":22162,"journal":{"name":"Systematic Reviews","volume":"14 1","pages":"7"},"PeriodicalIF":6.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11708070/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Systematic Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-024-02750-7","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Postoperative antibiotic prophylaxis (PAP) involves using antibiotics after surgery to prevent surgical site infections (SSIs). However, studies have shown that PAP offers no additional benefits compared to discontinuation after surgical incision closure, prompting its de-implementation to prevent unnecessary antibiotic use that may contribute to antibiotic resistance. We conducted this review to synthesize evidence for guiding the design and implementation of effective strategies for discontinuing PAP practice and optimizing antibiotic use in surgical settings.

Methods: This umbrella review searched for articles from PubMed/MEDLINE and Scopus, focusing on reviews conducted on human subjects on PAP to prevent SSIs, published in English language from 2019 to 5th July 2024. This review followed guidelines from PRISMA-P and PRIOR. The risk of bias (methodological quality) was assessed using AMSTAR-2. The pooled risk ratio (RR) was estimated using a fixed-effects model (Mantel-Haenszel method), while I2 was used to assess the heterogeneity between reviews. This review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42024566124).

Results: In our umbrella review, we screened 1156 articles, with 28 review articles found eligible for final analysis, involving over 457 primary studies. About 80,483 patients were involved in 9 meta-analysis reviews, which were used to estimate the pooled RR. We found no significant benefits to patients from continuing PAP beyond 24-h post-surgery compared to immediate discontinuation, RR: 1.07 (95% CI: 0.97-1.17, I2: 25%, p-value: 0.22). Strategies such as regularly assessing and refining guidelines to fit specific surgical settings and patients' characteristics, multidisciplinary collaboration, availability of resources needed for best practices, education and training healthcare workers on SSI prevention and antibiotic stewardship, and patient education in SSI prevention and proper antibiotic use were recommended to improve best practices in surgical settings.

Conclusions: Prolonging antibiotic prophylaxis beyond 24-h post-surgery did not show significant protective benefits against SSIs. Our findings support the 2018 WHO recommendation for the immediate discontinuation of PAP following surgical incision closure in clean and clean-contaminated procedures. Further de-implementation research studies are needed to guide the effective discontinuation of PAP practice.

综合证据以指导设计和实施手术环境中停止术后抗生素预防的有效战略:对世卫组织2018年后建议的总括性审查。
背景:术后抗生素预防(PAP)是指术后使用抗生素预防手术部位感染(ssi)。然而,研究表明,与手术切口关闭后停用相比,PAP没有额外的益处,这促使其取消实施,以防止可能导致抗生素耐药性的不必要的抗生素使用。我们进行了这一综述,以综合证据来指导设计和实施有效的策略,以停止PAP实践和优化外科环境中的抗生素使用。方法:本综述检索了PubMed/MEDLINE和Scopus中的文章,重点是2019年至2024年7月5日以英文发表的关于PAP预防ssi的人类受试者的综述。本综述遵循PRISMA-P和PRIOR指南。使用AMSTAR-2评估偏倚风险(方法学质量)。使用固定效应模型(Mantel-Haenszel方法)估计合并风险比(RR),使用I2评估评价间的异质性。本综述已在普洛斯彼罗注册(CRD42024566124)。结果:在我们的总括性综述中,我们筛选了1156篇文章,其中28篇综述文章符合最终分析的条件,涉及超过457项主要研究。9项荟萃分析综述涉及约80,483名患者,用于估计合并RR。我们发现,与立即停止PAP相比,术后24小时继续PAP对患者没有显著益处,RR: 1.07 (95% CI: 0.97-1.17, I2: 25%, p值:0.22)。建议的策略包括定期评估和完善指南以适应特定的手术环境和患者特征、多学科合作、最佳实践所需资源的可用性、卫生保健工作者在SSI预防和抗生素管理方面的教育和培训,以及患者在SSI预防和正确使用抗生素方面的教育,以改善手术环境中的最佳实践。结论:术后24小时后延长抗生素预防并没有显示出对ssi的显著保护作用。我们的研究结果支持2018年世卫组织关于在清洁和清洁污染程序中手术切口关闭后立即停止PAP的建议。需要进一步的反实施研究,以指导有效停止PAP做法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Systematic Reviews
Systematic Reviews Medicine-Medicine (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
8.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
241
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊介绍: Systematic Reviews encompasses all aspects of the design, conduct and reporting of systematic reviews. The journal publishes high quality systematic review products including systematic review protocols, systematic reviews related to a very broad definition of health, rapid reviews, updates of already completed systematic reviews, and methods research related to the science of systematic reviews, such as decision modelling. At this time Systematic Reviews does not accept reviews of in vitro studies. The journal also aims to ensure that the results of all well-conducted systematic reviews are published, regardless of their outcome.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信