Progress on implementation of the World Health Organization global antimicrobial resistance surveillance system recommendations on antimicrobial resistance surveillance in Africa: Findings of preliminary analysis of a scoping review

IF 4.8 2区 医学 Q1 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Dr Mackline Hope, Dr Reuben Kiggundu, Mr Dickson Tabajjwa, Mr Fahad Lwigale, Mr Herman Mwanja, Dr Conrad Tumwine, Dr Jonathan Mayito, Dr Dathan M Byonanebye, Dr Andrew Kambugu, Dr Francis Kakooza
{"title":"Progress on implementation of the World Health Organization global antimicrobial resistance surveillance system recommendations on antimicrobial resistance surveillance in Africa: Findings of preliminary analysis of a scoping review","authors":"Dr Mackline Hope,&nbsp;Dr Reuben Kiggundu,&nbsp;Mr Dickson Tabajjwa,&nbsp;Mr Fahad Lwigale,&nbsp;Mr Herman Mwanja,&nbsp;Dr Conrad Tumwine,&nbsp;Dr Jonathan Mayito,&nbsp;Dr Dathan M Byonanebye,&nbsp;Dr Andrew Kambugu,&nbsp;Dr Francis Kakooza","doi":"10.1016/j.ijid.2024.107396","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a significant global health concern, especially impacting low- and middle-income countries. The World Health Organization (WHO) global antimicrobial resistance surveillance system (GLASS) was rolled out in 2016 to guide AMR surveillance systems. However, its implementation has not been fully evaluated. We conducted a scoping review of the current status of implementation of GLASS and present preliminary findings.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We developed a search strategy and retrieved articles conducted between January 2016 and November 2023 from four electronic databases (MEDLINE, SCOPUS, CINAHL, and Embase). We followed the Arksey and O'Malley's methodological framework for scoping reviews to guide analysis and reporting. We extracted data on priority samples, pathogens, pathogen-antibiotic combinations and assessed compliance to WHO GLASS recommendations on AST and AMR surveillance.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>7477 articles were identified, 6868 duplicates and irrelevant articles were removed at abstract screening, and 609 studies were included for the full-text review, of which 344 were considered for data extraction. Of the 344 studies, 38/344 (11%) were included in this analysis. Majority of studies were conducted in Eastern 50% (19/38), followed by Western 34% (13/38) and Northern 16% (6/38), Africa. 95% (36/38) of studies were conducted in hospital settings. Majority 92% (35/38) of the studies involved only one priority sample type (blood 46% (16/35); urine 32% (11/35) and stool 23% (8/35); while 8% (3/38) studies involved the collection of two priority sample types, specifically urine and blood. Of the 19 studies that focused on blood as a priority sample type, 8 (42%), 11 (58%), 13 (68%), 10 (53%), 1 (5%) and 5 (26%) recovered Acinetobacter baumannii, Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Staphylococcus aureus, and Salmonella species respectively. Shigella and Salmonella species were recovered from 6 (75%) and 7 (88%) of the 8 studies that focused on stool. Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae were also recovered from 11 (79%) of the 14 studies that focused on urine. Compliance to GLASS priority pathogen-antibiotic combinations was 13% (1/8), 9% (1/11), 8% (1/13), 70% (7/10), and 60% (3/5) of the studies that recovered Acinetobacter baumannii, Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Staphylococcus aureus, and Salmonella species from blood respectively. 17% (1/6) and 29% (2/7) of the studies that recovered Salmonella and Shigella species from stool followed the GLASS priority pathogen-antibiotic combinations for AST. None of the studies on urine followed the GLASS-recommended pathogen-antibiotic combination.</div></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><div>Africa has made progress in implementing the GLASS recommendations. However, adoption of GLASS recommendations including appropriate pathogen-antibiotic combinations for priority pathogens and samples, varied across countries. This limits a standardisation and comparability of data.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Gaps exist in AST for AMR surveillance with priority pathogen-antibiotic combinations not routinely tested in most surveillance programs. A full report from this study will be published by June 2024.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":14006,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Infectious Diseases","volume":"152 ","pages":"Article 107396"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Infectious Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1201971224004715","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a significant global health concern, especially impacting low- and middle-income countries. The World Health Organization (WHO) global antimicrobial resistance surveillance system (GLASS) was rolled out in 2016 to guide AMR surveillance systems. However, its implementation has not been fully evaluated. We conducted a scoping review of the current status of implementation of GLASS and present preliminary findings.

Methods

We developed a search strategy and retrieved articles conducted between January 2016 and November 2023 from four electronic databases (MEDLINE, SCOPUS, CINAHL, and Embase). We followed the Arksey and O'Malley's methodological framework for scoping reviews to guide analysis and reporting. We extracted data on priority samples, pathogens, pathogen-antibiotic combinations and assessed compliance to WHO GLASS recommendations on AST and AMR surveillance.

Results

7477 articles were identified, 6868 duplicates and irrelevant articles were removed at abstract screening, and 609 studies were included for the full-text review, of which 344 were considered for data extraction. Of the 344 studies, 38/344 (11%) were included in this analysis. Majority of studies were conducted in Eastern 50% (19/38), followed by Western 34% (13/38) and Northern 16% (6/38), Africa. 95% (36/38) of studies were conducted in hospital settings. Majority 92% (35/38) of the studies involved only one priority sample type (blood 46% (16/35); urine 32% (11/35) and stool 23% (8/35); while 8% (3/38) studies involved the collection of two priority sample types, specifically urine and blood. Of the 19 studies that focused on blood as a priority sample type, 8 (42%), 11 (58%), 13 (68%), 10 (53%), 1 (5%) and 5 (26%) recovered Acinetobacter baumannii, Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Staphylococcus aureus, and Salmonella species respectively. Shigella and Salmonella species were recovered from 6 (75%) and 7 (88%) of the 8 studies that focused on stool. Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae were also recovered from 11 (79%) of the 14 studies that focused on urine. Compliance to GLASS priority pathogen-antibiotic combinations was 13% (1/8), 9% (1/11), 8% (1/13), 70% (7/10), and 60% (3/5) of the studies that recovered Acinetobacter baumannii, Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Staphylococcus aureus, and Salmonella species from blood respectively. 17% (1/6) and 29% (2/7) of the studies that recovered Salmonella and Shigella species from stool followed the GLASS priority pathogen-antibiotic combinations for AST. None of the studies on urine followed the GLASS-recommended pathogen-antibiotic combination.

Discussion

Africa has made progress in implementing the GLASS recommendations. However, adoption of GLASS recommendations including appropriate pathogen-antibiotic combinations for priority pathogens and samples, varied across countries. This limits a standardisation and comparability of data.

Conclusion

Gaps exist in AST for AMR surveillance with priority pathogen-antibiotic combinations not routinely tested in most surveillance programs. A full report from this study will be published by June 2024.
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
18.90
自引率
2.40%
发文量
1020
审稿时长
30 days
期刊介绍: International Journal of Infectious Diseases (IJID) Publisher: International Society for Infectious Diseases Publication Frequency: Monthly Type: Peer-reviewed, Open Access Scope: Publishes original clinical and laboratory-based research. Reports clinical trials, reviews, and some case reports. Focuses on epidemiology, clinical diagnosis, treatment, and control of infectious diseases. Emphasizes diseases common in under-resourced countries.
×
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