Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a global public health crisis that impedes the therapeutic effectiveness of available antimicrobial agents. Due to the high burden of infectious diseases and limited resources, especially trained healthcare professionals, low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) are particularly susceptible to the detrimental effects of AMR. Sometimes, as the first and last point of contact for patients seeking treatment for infections, community pharmacists can play a pivotal role in the stewardship required for AMR. This review aims to highlight the contributions made by community pharmacists in LMICs as AMR stewards. The review considers the challenges from the perspectives of limited resources, inadequate training, a lack of policies and regulations, and issues related to patient behavior. Community pharmacists in LMICs could optimize their advocacy contributions by focusing on One Health AMR stewardship. Transformational and actionable patient and population-centric antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) is feasible with the synergy of policymakers and other healthcare providers in the implementation of AMS policies and programs that support community pharmacists in their efforts to promote rational antimicrobial use.

The issue of bacterial infections in COVID-19 patients has received increasing attention. Scant data are available on the impact of bacterial superinfection and antibiotic administration on the outcome of hospitalized COVID-19 patients. We conducted a literature review from 1 January 2022 to 31 March 2024 to assess the current burden of bacterial infection and the evidence for antibiotic use in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Published articles providing data on antibiotic use in COVID-19 patients were identified through computerized literature searches with the search terms [(antibiotic) AND (COVID-19)] or [(antibiotic treatment) AND (COVID-19)]. PubMed and SCOPUS databases were searched from 1 January 2022 to 31 March 2024. No attempt was made to obtain information about unpublished studies. English language restriction was applied. The quality of the included studies was evaluated by the tool recommended by the Joanna Briggs Institute. Both quantitative and qualitative information were summarized by means of textual descriptions. Five hundred fifty-one studies were identified, and twenty-nine studies were included in this systematic review. Of the 29 included studies, 18 studies were on the prevalence of bacterial infection and antibiotic use in hospitalized COVID-19 patients; 4 studies reported on the efficacy of early antibiotic use in COVID-19; 4 studies were on the use of sepsis biomarkers to improve antibiotic use; 3 studies were on the efficacy of antimicrobial stewardship programs and predictive models among COVID-19-hospitalized patients. The quality of included studies was high in 35% and medium in 62%. High rates of hospital-acquired infections were reported among COVID-19 patients, ranging between 7.5 and 37.7%. A high antibiotic resistance rate was reported among COVID-19 patients developing hospital-acquired infections, with a high in-hospital mortality rate. The studies evaluating multi-faceted antimicrobial stewardship interventions reported efficacy in decreasing antibiotic consumption and lower in-hospital mortality.

UNASSIGNED: Digital clinical decision support (CDS) tools are of growing importance in supporting healthcare professionals in understanding complex clinical problems and arriving at decisions that improve patient outcomes. CDS tools are also increasingly used to improve antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) practices in healthcare settings. However, far fewer CDS tools are available in lowerand middle-income countries (LMICs) and in animal health settings, where their use in improving diagnostic and treatment decision-making is likely to have the greatest impact. The aim of this study was to evaluate digital CDS tools designed as a direct aid to support diagnosis and/or treatment decisionmaking, by reviewing their scope, functions, methodologies, and quality. Recommendations for the development of veterinary CDS tools in LMICs are then provided.
UNASSIGNED: The review considered studies and reports published between January 2017 and October 2023 in the English language in peer-reviewed and gray literature.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 41 studies and reports detailing CDS tools were included in the final review, with 35 CDS tools designed for human healthcare settings and six tools for animal healthcare settings. Of the tools reviewed, the majority were deployed in high-income countries (80.5%). Support for AMS programs was a feature in 12 (29.3%) of the tools, with 10 tools in human healthcare settings. The capabilities of the CDS tools varied when reviewed against the GUIDES checklist.
UNASSIGNED: We recommend a methodological approach for the development of veterinary CDS tools in LMICs predicated on securing sufficient and sustainable funding. Employing a multidisciplinary development team is an important first step. Developing standalone CDS tools using Bayesian algorithms based on local expert knowledge will provide users with rapid and reliable access to quality guidance on diagnoses and treatments. Such tools are likely to contribute to improved disease management on farms and reduce inappropriate antimicrobial use, thus supporting AMS practices in areas of high need.

Excessive and improper use of antibiotics causes antimicrobial resistance which is a major threat to global health security. Hospitals in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) has the highest prevalence of antibiotic use. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine the pooled point prevalence (PPP) of evidence-based antimicrobial use among hospitalized patients in SSA. Literature was retrieved from CINAHL, EMBASE, Google Scholar, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases. Meta-analysis was conducted using STATA version 17. Forest plots using the random-effect model were used to present the findings. The heterogeneity and publication bias were assessed using the I2 statistics and Egger\'s test. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO with code CRD42023404075. The review was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. A total of 26, 272 study participants reported by twenty-eight studies published from 10 countries in SSA were included. The pooled point prevalence of antimicrobial use in SSA were 64%. The pooled estimate of hospital wards with the highest antibiotic use were intensive care unit (89%). The pooled prevalence of the most common clinical indication for antibiotic use were community acquired infection (41%). The pooled point prevalence of antimicrobial use among hospitalized patients were higher in SSA. Higher use of antibiotics was recorded in intensive care units. Community acquired infection were most common clinical case among hospitalized patients. Health systems in SSA must design innovative digital health interventions to optimize clinicians adhere to evidence-based prescribing guidelines and improve antimicrobial stewardship.

The spread of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a global challenge. Close and continuous surveillance for quick detection of AMR can be difficult, especially in remote places. This narrative review focuses on the contributions of pharmacovigilance (PV) as an auxiliary tool for identifying and monitoring the ineffectiveness, resistance, and inappropriate use of antibiotics (ABs). The terms \"drug ineffective\", \"therapeutic failure\", \"drug resistance\", \"pathogen resistance\", and \"multidrug resistance\" were found in PV databases and dictionaries, denoting ineffectiveness. These terms cover a range of problems that should be better investigated because they are useful in warning about possible causes of AMR. \"Medication errors\", especially those related to dose and indication, and \"Off-label use\" are highlighted in the literature, suggesting inappropriate use of ABs. Hence, the included studies show that the terms of interest related to AMR and use are not only present but frequent in PV surveillance programs. This review illustrates the feasibility of using PV as a complementary tool for antimicrobial stewardship activities, especially in scenarios where other resources are scarce.

The emergent threat of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) has resulted in debates around the use and preservation of effective antimicrobials. Concerns around AMR reflect a history of increasing dependence on antibiotics to address disease epidemics rooted in profound structural and systemic challenges. In the context of global health, this process, often referred to as pharmaceuticalisation, has commonly occurred within disease programmes, of which lessons are vital for adding nuance to conversations around antimicrobial stewardship. Tuberculosis (TB) is a notable example. A disease which accounts for one-third of AMR globally and remains the leading cause of death from a single infectious agent in many low - and middle-income countries, including South Africa. In this scoping review, we chart TB science in South Africa over 70 years of programming. We reviewed published manuscripts about the programme and critically reflected on the implications of our findings for stewardship. We identified cycles of programmatic responses to new drug availability and the emergence of drug resistance, which intersected with cycles of pharmaceuticalisation. These cycles reflect the political, economic, and social factors influencing programmatic decision-making. Our analysis offers a starting point for research exploring these cycles and drawing out implications for stewardship across the TB and AMR communities.

OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic has posed a significant threat to the global healthcare system, presenting a major challenge to antimicrobial stewardship worldwide. This study aimed to provide a comprehensive and up-to-date picture of global antimicrobial resistance (AMR) and antibiotic use in COVID-19 patients.
METHODS: We conducted a systematic review to determine the prevalence of AMR and antibiotic usage among COVID-19 patients receiving treatment in healthcare facilities. Our search encompassed the PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Scopus databases, spanning studies published from December 2019 to May 2023. We utilized random-effects meta-analysis to assess the prevalence of multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) and antibiotic use in COVID-19 patients, aligning with both the WHO\'s priority list of MDROs and the AWaRe list of antibiotic products. Estimates were stratified by region, country, and country income. Meta-regression models were established to identify predictors of MDRO prevalence and antibiotic use in COVID-19 patients. The study protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD 42023449396).
RESULTS: Among the 11,050 studies screened, 173 were included in the review, encompassing a total of 892,312 COVID-19 patients. MDROs were observed in 42.9% (95% CI 31.1-54.5%, I2 = 99.90%) of COVID-19 patients: 41.0% (95% CI 35.5-46.6%) for carbapenem-resistant organisms (CRO), 19.9% (95% CI 13.4-27.2%) for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), 24.9% (95% CI 16.7-34.1%) for extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing organisms (ESBL), and 22.9% (95% CI 13.0-34.5%) for vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus species (VRE), respectively. Overall, 76.2% (95% CI 69.5-82.9%, I2 = 99.99%) of COVID-19 patients were treated with antibiotics: 29.6% (95% CI 26.0-33.4%) with \"Watch\" antibiotics, 22.4% (95% CI 18.0-26.7%) with \"Reserve\" antibiotics, and 16.5% (95% CI 13.3-19.7%) with \"Access\" antibiotics. The MDRO prevalence and antibiotic use were significantly higher in low- and middle-income countries than in high-income countries, with the lowest proportion of antibiotic use (60.1% (95% CI 52.1-68.0%)) and MDRO prevalence (29.1% (95% CI 21.8-36.4%)) in North America, the highest MDRO prevalence in the Middle East and North Africa (63.9% (95% CI 46.6-81.2%)), and the highest proportion of antibiotic use in South Asia (92.7% (95% CI 90.4-95.0%)). The meta-regression identified antibiotic use and ICU admission as a significant predictor of higher prevalence of MDROs in COVID-19 patients.
CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review offers a comprehensive and current assessment of MDRO prevalence and antibiotic use among COVID-19 patients in healthcare facilities. It underscores the formidable challenge facing global efforts to prevent and control AMR amidst the backdrop of the COVID-19 pandemic. These findings serve as a crucial warning to policymakers, highlighting the urgent need to enhance antimicrobial stewardship strategies to mitigate the risks associated with future pandemics.

Introduction. The term \'diagnostic stewardship\' is relatively new, with a recent surge in its use within the literature. Despite its increasing popularity, a precise definition remains elusive. Various attempts have been made to define it, with some viewing it as an integral part of antimicrobial stewardship. The World Health Organization offers a broad definition, emphasizing the importance of timely, accurate diagnostics. However, inconsistencies in the use of this term still persist, necessitating further clarification.Gap Statement. There are currently inconsistencies in the definition of diagnostic stewardship used within the academic literature.Aim. This scoping review aims to categorize the use of diagnostic stewardship approaches and define this approach by identifying common characteristics and factors of its use within the literature.Methodology. This scoping review undertook a multi-database search from date of inception until October 2022. Any observational or experimental study where the authors define the intervention to be diagnostic stewardship from any clinical area was included. Screening of all papers was undertaken by a single reviewer with 10% verification by a second reviewer. Data extraction was undertaken by a single reviewer using a pre-piloted form. Given the wide variation in study design and intervention outcomes, a narrative synthesis approach was applied. Studies were clustered around common diagnostic stewardship interventions where appropriate.Results. After duplicate removal, a total of 1310 citations were identified, of which, after full-paper screening, 105 studies were included in this scoping review. The classification of an intervention as taking a diagnostic stewardship approach is a relatively recent development, with the first publication in this field dating back to 2017. The majority of research in this area has been conducted within the USA, with very few studies undertaken outside this region. Visual inspection of the citation map reveals that the current evidence base is interconnected, with frequent references to each other\'s work. The interventions commonly adopt a restrictive approach, utilizing hard and soft stops within the pre-analytical phase to restrict access to testing. Upon closer examination of the outcomes, it becomes evident that there is a predominant focus on reducing the number of tests rather than enhancing the current test protocol. This is further reflected in the limited number of studies that report on test performance (including protocol improvements, specificity and sensitivity).Conclusion. Diagnostic stewardship seems to have deviated from its intended course, morphing into a rather rudimentary instrument wielded not to enhance but to constrict the scope of testing. Despite the World Health Organization\'s advocacy for an ideology that promotes a more comprehensive approach to quality improvement, it may be more appropriate to consider alternative regional narratives when categorizing these types of quality improvement interventions.

BACKGROUND: Specific data concerning the efficacy of alternative antibiotics for carbapenems against complicated urinary tract infections (cUTIs) attributed to antimicrobial-resistant (AMR) uropathogens are lacking.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the efficacy of carbapenems and non-carbapenem antibiotics in the clinical outcomes of cUTIs caused by AMR uropathogens.
METHODS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, databases, including MEDLINE/PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Embase and ClinicalTrials.gov, were searched. The study eligibility criteria were research articles conducted as randomised controlled trials that evaluated the composite outcomes of cUTIs. Participants were adult patients with cUTIs caused by gram-negative uropathogens resistant to third-generation cephalosporins. The intervention involved a non-carbapenem class of antimicrobial agents with in vitro activities against gram-negative uropathogens resistant to third-generation cephalosporins. Two independent researchers assessed the risk-of-bias using the second version of the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomised trials. The treatment effects on each outcome were estimated as a risk ratio (RR) with a 95 % confidence interval (CI) using the random-effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed using the Cochrane Q-test and I2 statistics.
RESULTS: Through database searches, 955 articles were retrieved. After screening the titles and abstracts, 52 articles were screened in full text. Finally, 12 studies met the inclusion criteria. No significant differences in efficacy were observed between alternative antibiotics and carbapenems (composite outcome, RR, 0.96; 95 % CI, 0.63-1.49; I2 = 21 %; low certainty of evidence).
CONCLUSIONS: Alternative antibiotics had clinical efficacy similar to that of carbapenems for treating patients with cUTI caused by gram-negative uropathogens resistant to third-generation cephalosporins.

The optimal duration of therapy for Pseudomonas aeruginosa bloodstream infection (PSA-BSI) is unknown, with prolonged therapy frequently favored due to severity of infection, patient complexity, risk of multi-drug resistance, and high mortality. We therefore conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies with head-to-head comparison of short versus prolonged therapy for PSA-BSI. A comprehensive search including Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Scopus was performed. We pooled risk ratios using DerSimonian-Laird random effects model and performed subgroup analysis of outcomes including all-cause mortality, recurrent infection, and composite of these outcomes among patients receiving short versus prolonged therapy for PSA-BSI. Heterogeneity was assessed by the I2-index. Risk of bias for cohort studies was assessed using ROBINS-I tool. Of the 908 identified studies, six were included in the systematic review and five studies with head-to-head comparison of treatment duration were assessed in the meta-analysis, totalling 1746 patients. No significant difference in propensity score-weighted composite outcome (30-day all-cause mortality or recurrent infection) was noted between patients receiving short or prolonged therapy, with a pooled RR risk ratio of 0.80 (95% CI confidence interval 0.51-1.25, P=0.32; I2 = 0%). Additionally, duration of therapy did not impact individual outcomes of 30-day all-cause mortality or recurrent/persistent infection. Our meta-analysis demonstrated that short duration of antimicrobial therapy may have similar efficacy to prolonged treatment for PSA-BSI. Future randomized trials will be necessary to definitively determine optimal management of PSA bacteraemia.