Antibiotic treatment of pediatric infections in primary healthcare setting: evaluation and comparison of 80 national treatment guidelines with the WHO AWaRe book recommendations.

IF 10 1区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
EClinicalMedicine Pub Date : 2025-08-21 eCollection Date: 2025-09-01 DOI:10.1016/j.eclinm.2025.103437
Daniele Donà, Giulia Brigadoi, Anna Cantarutti, Giovanni Autore, Marco Masetti, Shrey Mathur, Mike Sharland, Susanna Esposito
{"title":"Antibiotic treatment of pediatric infections in primary healthcare setting: evaluation and comparison of 80 national treatment guidelines with the WHO AWaRe book recommendations.","authors":"Daniele Donà, Giulia Brigadoi, Anna Cantarutti, Giovanni Autore, Marco Masetti, Shrey Mathur, Mike Sharland, Susanna Esposito","doi":"10.1016/j.eclinm.2025.103437","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Antibiotic recommendations for pediatric infections in national standard treatment guidelines (STGs) vary widely, particularly for Access and Watch antibiotics. The WHO AWaRe book recommends Access antibiotics as first-line treatment for over 80% of common infections managed in primary healthcare. This study aims to evaluate the agreement between first and second-line antibiotics in national STGs with AWaRe book recommendations and the inclusion of these antibiotics in Essential Medicine Lists (EMLs).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>National STGs of 80 countries were systematically collected from databases and grey literature (up to May 2025). Antibiotic recommendations for the ten most common primary healthcare infections in children were compared with the WHO AWaRe book (2022), the WHO Essential Medicines List for children (EMLc) and national Essential Medicines Lists (nEMLs) where available.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>A median of eight STGs per country were collected, with higher numbers in LMICs due to guidelines for cholera and enteric fever. A total of 1124 first-line and 841 second-line antibiotic recommendations were identified. Over 70% of first-line recommended treatments were Access antibiotics, while Watch antibiotics accounted for more than 50% of second-line recommended treatments. First-line recommendations showed strong agreement with WHO guidance, whereas second-line treatments exhibited lower agreement and greater variability across regions. More than 80% of first-line antibiotics were included in the EMLc and nEMLs, although some high-income countries lacked nEMLs.</p><p><strong>Interpretation: </strong>First-line antibiotic recommendations in national pediatric STGs largely align with the WHO AWaRe book guidance focusing on Access antibiotic use. In contrast, second-line treatments vary considerably, commonly recommending Watch antibiotics. Strengthening the evidence base of national STGs and aligning second-line recommendations with the WHO AWaRe book could help meet the 79th UNGA High-Level Meeting on AMR target, which aims for 70% of all human antibiotic use to come from the Access group.</p><p><strong>Funding: </strong>PRIN 2022 \"A Cluster randomized clinical trial to change Antibiotic Prescribing behavior in Outpatient pediatric primary care setting in Italy (CAPO project)\", funded in the framework of the National Recovery and Resilience Plan (NRRP), Mission 4, Component 2, Investment 1.1, funded by the European Union-Next Generation EU, Project 2022A7LA2W, CUP C53D23006050006.</p>","PeriodicalId":11393,"journal":{"name":"EClinicalMedicine","volume":"87 ","pages":"103437"},"PeriodicalIF":10.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12396473/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"EClinicalMedicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eclinm.2025.103437","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/9/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Antibiotic recommendations for pediatric infections in national standard treatment guidelines (STGs) vary widely, particularly for Access and Watch antibiotics. The WHO AWaRe book recommends Access antibiotics as first-line treatment for over 80% of common infections managed in primary healthcare. This study aims to evaluate the agreement between first and second-line antibiotics in national STGs with AWaRe book recommendations and the inclusion of these antibiotics in Essential Medicine Lists (EMLs).

Methods: National STGs of 80 countries were systematically collected from databases and grey literature (up to May 2025). Antibiotic recommendations for the ten most common primary healthcare infections in children were compared with the WHO AWaRe book (2022), the WHO Essential Medicines List for children (EMLc) and national Essential Medicines Lists (nEMLs) where available.

Findings: A median of eight STGs per country were collected, with higher numbers in LMICs due to guidelines for cholera and enteric fever. A total of 1124 first-line and 841 second-line antibiotic recommendations were identified. Over 70% of first-line recommended treatments were Access antibiotics, while Watch antibiotics accounted for more than 50% of second-line recommended treatments. First-line recommendations showed strong agreement with WHO guidance, whereas second-line treatments exhibited lower agreement and greater variability across regions. More than 80% of first-line antibiotics were included in the EMLc and nEMLs, although some high-income countries lacked nEMLs.

Interpretation: First-line antibiotic recommendations in national pediatric STGs largely align with the WHO AWaRe book guidance focusing on Access antibiotic use. In contrast, second-line treatments vary considerably, commonly recommending Watch antibiotics. Strengthening the evidence base of national STGs and aligning second-line recommendations with the WHO AWaRe book could help meet the 79th UNGA High-Level Meeting on AMR target, which aims for 70% of all human antibiotic use to come from the Access group.

Funding: PRIN 2022 "A Cluster randomized clinical trial to change Antibiotic Prescribing behavior in Outpatient pediatric primary care setting in Italy (CAPO project)", funded in the framework of the National Recovery and Resilience Plan (NRRP), Mission 4, Component 2, Investment 1.1, funded by the European Union-Next Generation EU, Project 2022A7LA2W, CUP C53D23006050006.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

初级卫生保健环境中儿科感染的抗生素治疗:80个国家治疗指南与世卫组织AWaRe书籍建议的评估和比较
背景:国家标准治疗指南(STGs)对儿科感染的抗生素建议差异很大,特别是对Access和Watch抗生素的建议。世卫组织《提高认识》一书建议将获取抗生素作为初级卫生保健中80%以上常见感染的一线治疗方法。本研究旨在评估国家STGs中一线和二线抗生素与AWaRe书籍建议之间的一致性,以及将这些抗生素纳入基本药物清单(EMLs)。方法:系统地从数据库和灰色文献(截至2025年5月)中收集80个国家的国家STGs。将针对儿童十大最常见初级卫生保健感染的抗生素建议与世卫组织《意识》(2022年)、世卫组织儿童基本药物清单(EMLc)和国家基本药物清单(nEMLs)进行比较。结果:每个国家收集的STGs中位数为8个,由于制定了霍乱和肠热指南,中低收入国家的STGs数量更高。总共确定了1124种一线抗生素建议和841种二线抗生素建议。70%以上的一线推荐治疗是Access抗生素,而Watch抗生素占二线推荐治疗的50%以上。一线建议与世卫组织指导意见高度一致,而二线治疗的一致性较低,各地区差异较大。尽管一些高收入国家缺乏基本药物清单,但80%以上的一线抗生素被纳入了基本药物清单和基本药物清单。解释:国家儿科STGs中的一线抗生素建议在很大程度上与世卫组织AWaRe书籍指南一致,重点关注抗生素的使用。相比之下,二线治疗差异很大,通常建议使用Watch抗生素。加强国家可持续发展战略的证据基础,并使二线建议与世卫组织《提高认识》手册保持一致,可有助于实现第79届联合国大会抗菌素耐药性高级别会议的目标,即所有人类抗生素使用的70%来自获取小组。资助:PRIN 2022“改变意大利门诊儿科初级保健机构抗生素处方行为的集群随机临床试验(CAPO项目)”,在国家恢复和恢复计划(NRRP)框架下资助,任务4,组成部分2,投资1.1,由欧盟-下一代欧盟资助,项目2022A7LA2W, CUP C53D23006050006。
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
EClinicalMedicine
EClinicalMedicine Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
18.90
自引率
1.30%
发文量
506
审稿时长
22 days
期刊介绍: eClinicalMedicine is a gold open-access clinical journal designed to support frontline health professionals in addressing the complex and rapid health transitions affecting societies globally. The journal aims to assist practitioners in overcoming healthcare challenges across diverse communities, spanning diagnosis, treatment, prevention, and health promotion. Integrating disciplines from various specialties and life stages, it seeks to enhance health systems as fundamental institutions within societies. With a forward-thinking approach, eClinicalMedicine aims to redefine the future of healthcare.
×
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