Systematic review and meta-analysis protocol of impact of pharmacist-led antibiotic stewardship audit-feedback intervention.

IF 1.6 Q2 MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES
MethodsX Pub Date : 2025-05-30 eCollection Date: 2025-06-01 DOI:10.1016/j.mex.2025.103399
Duaa Salem Jawhar, Amer Hayat Khan, Khurshid Alam
{"title":"Systematic review and meta-analysis protocol of impact of pharmacist-led antibiotic stewardship audit-feedback intervention.","authors":"Duaa Salem Jawhar, Amer Hayat Khan, Khurshid Alam","doi":"10.1016/j.mex.2025.103399","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The rise of resistance to antibiotic agents continues to present a substantial challenge to healthcare systems. In response, antibiotic stewardship programs (ASPs) have been widely endorsed as a core strategy to promote the responsible use of antimicrobials and to curb the progression of antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Pharmacist-led audit and feedback interventions hold significant promise due to pharmacists' clinical expertise and direct role in optimizing antimicrobial prescribing. However, despite their potential, the current body of evidence evaluating the effectiveness of pharmacist-led audit and feedback within ASPs remains limited and fragmented. A clearer understanding of their impact is essential to inform policy decisions, support broader implementation, and enhance the overall effectiveness of stewardship efforts. This protocol has been registered with the PROSPERO under the registration number CRD420251036088. The review will be conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines.A comprehensive search will be carried out across four major databases, and studies will be selected based on clearly defined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The risk of bias in the included studies will be assessed using Cochrane riak of bias assessment tools. Publication bias will be examined using funnel plots and Egger's test. For the quantitative synthesis, a random-effects model will be employed.•This protocol outlines a rigorous plan for conducting a high-quality meta-analysis examining the impact of pharmacist-led audit and feedback interventions within antibiotic stewardship programs.•It details the full methodological framework, from topic selection through to the statistical approaches planned for data synthesis.•By publicly sharing our protocol through an academic publishing platform, we aim to promote transparency, invite constructive input, and contribute to raising the methodological standards for meta-analyses in the domain of antibiotic stewardship.</p>","PeriodicalId":18446,"journal":{"name":"MethodsX","volume":"14 ","pages":"103399"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12177175/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"MethodsX","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mex.2025.103399","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/6/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The rise of resistance to antibiotic agents continues to present a substantial challenge to healthcare systems. In response, antibiotic stewardship programs (ASPs) have been widely endorsed as a core strategy to promote the responsible use of antimicrobials and to curb the progression of antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Pharmacist-led audit and feedback interventions hold significant promise due to pharmacists' clinical expertise and direct role in optimizing antimicrobial prescribing. However, despite their potential, the current body of evidence evaluating the effectiveness of pharmacist-led audit and feedback within ASPs remains limited and fragmented. A clearer understanding of their impact is essential to inform policy decisions, support broader implementation, and enhance the overall effectiveness of stewardship efforts. This protocol has been registered with the PROSPERO under the registration number CRD420251036088. The review will be conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines.A comprehensive search will be carried out across four major databases, and studies will be selected based on clearly defined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The risk of bias in the included studies will be assessed using Cochrane riak of bias assessment tools. Publication bias will be examined using funnel plots and Egger's test. For the quantitative synthesis, a random-effects model will be employed.•This protocol outlines a rigorous plan for conducting a high-quality meta-analysis examining the impact of pharmacist-led audit and feedback interventions within antibiotic stewardship programs.•It details the full methodological framework, from topic selection through to the statistical approaches planned for data synthesis.•By publicly sharing our protocol through an academic publishing platform, we aim to promote transparency, invite constructive input, and contribute to raising the methodological standards for meta-analyses in the domain of antibiotic stewardship.

药师主导的抗生素管理审计反馈干预影响的系统评价和荟萃分析方案。
抗生素耐药性的上升继续给医疗保健系统带来重大挑战。作为回应,抗生素管理规划(asp)已被广泛认可为促进负责任地使用抗菌素和遏制抗菌素耐药性(AMR)进展的核心战略。由于药剂师的临床专业知识和优化抗菌药物处方的直接作用,药剂师主导的审计和反馈干预措施具有重要的前景。然而,尽管有潜力,目前评估药师主导的asp审核和反馈有效性的证据仍然有限和分散。更清楚地了解它们的影响对于决策、支持更广泛的实施和提高管理工作的整体有效性至关重要。本协议已在普洛斯佩罗注册,注册号为CRD420251036088。审查将按照PRISMA的指导方针进行。将在四个主要数据库中进行全面检索,并根据明确定义的纳入和排除标准选择研究。纳入研究的偏倚风险将使用Cochrane风险偏倚评估工具进行评估。发表偏倚将使用漏斗图和Egger检验进行检验。为了定量综合,将采用随机效应模型。•本协议概述了一项严格的计划,用于进行高质量的荟萃分析,检查药剂师主导的审计和反馈干预在抗生素管理计划中的影响。•它详细介绍了完整的方法框架,从主题选择到为数据合成计划的统计方法。•通过学术出版平台公开分享我们的协议,我们的目标是提高透明度,邀请建设性意见,并为提高抗生素管理领域元分析的方法标准做出贡献。
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
MethodsX
MethodsX Health Professions-Medical Laboratory Technology
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
5.30%
发文量
314
审稿时长
7 weeks
期刊介绍:
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信