Timothy M Rawson1, Luke S P Moore2, Mark J Gilchrist3, Alison H Holmes2. 1. Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, Du Cane Road, London W12 0HS, UK National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit in Healthcare Associated Infections and Antimicrobial Resistance, Imperial College London, Hammersmith Campus, Du Cane Road, London W12 0NN, UK timothy.rawson07@imperial.ac.uk. 2. Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, Du Cane Road, London W12 0HS, UK National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit in Healthcare Associated Infections and Antimicrobial Resistance, Imperial College London, Hammersmith Campus, Du Cane Road, London W12 0NN, UK. 3. Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, Du Cane Road, London W12 0HS, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a public health priority and leading patient safety issue. Globally, antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) has been integral in promoting therapeutic optimization whilst minimizing harmful antimicrobial use. A cross-sectional, observational study was undertaken to investigate the coverage of AMS and antibacterial resistance across clinical scientific conferences in 2014, as a surrogate marker for current awareness and attributed importance. METHODS: Clinical specialties were identified, and the largest corresponding clinical scientific/research conferences in 2014 determined (i) within the UK and (ii) internationally. Conference characteristics and abstracts were interrogated and analysed to determine those related to AMS and AMR. Inter-specialty variation was assessed using χ(2) or Fisher's exact statistical analysis. RESULTS: In total, 45 conferences from 23 specialties were analysed representing 59,682 accepted abstracts. The UK had a significantly greater proportion of AMS-AMR-related abstracts compared with international conferences [2.8% (n = 221/7843) compared with 1.8% (n = 942/51,839); P < 0.001]. Infection conferences contained the greatest proportion of AMS-AMR abstracts, representing 20% (732/3669) of all abstracts [UK 66% (80/121) and international 18% (652/3548); P < 0.0001]. AMS-AMR coverage across all general specialties was poor [intensive care 9% (116/1287), surgical 1% (8/757) and medical specialties 0.64% (332/51,497)] despite high usage of antimicrobials across all. CONCLUSIONS: Despite current AMS-AMR strategies being advocated by infection specialists and discussed by national and international policy makers, AMS-AMR coverage remained limited across clinical specialty scientific conferences in 2014. We call for further intervention to ensure specialty engagement with AMS programmes and promote the AMR agenda across clinical practice.
BACKGROUND: Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a public health priority and leading patient safety issue. Globally, antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) has been integral in promoting therapeutic optimization whilst minimizing harmful antimicrobial use. A cross-sectional, observational study was undertaken to investigate the coverage of AMS and antibacterial resistance across clinical scientific conferences in 2014, as a surrogate marker for current awareness and attributed importance. METHODS: Clinical specialties were identified, and the largest corresponding clinical scientific/research conferences in 2014 determined (i) within the UK and (ii) internationally. Conference characteristics and abstracts were interrogated and analysed to determine those related to AMS and AMR. Inter-specialty variation was assessed using χ(2) or Fisher's exact statistical analysis. RESULTS: In total, 45 conferences from 23 specialties were analysed representing 59,682 accepted abstracts. The UK had a significantly greater proportion of AMS-AMR-related abstracts compared with international conferences [2.8% (n = 221/7843) compared with 1.8% (n = 942/51,839); P < 0.001]. Infection conferences contained the greatest proportion of AMS-AMR abstracts, representing 20% (732/3669) of all abstracts [UK 66% (80/121) and international 18% (652/3548); P < 0.0001]. AMS-AMR coverage across all general specialties was poor [intensive care 9% (116/1287), surgical 1% (8/757) and medical specialties 0.64% (332/51,497)] despite high usage of antimicrobials across all. CONCLUSIONS: Despite current AMS-AMR strategies being advocated by infection specialists and discussed by national and international policy makers, AMS-AMR coverage remained limited across clinical specialty scientific conferences in 2014. We call for further intervention to ensure specialty engagement with AMS programmes and promote the AMR agenda across clinical practice.
Authors: P Zarb; B Coignard; J Griskeviciene; A Muller; V Vankerckhoven; K Weist; Mm Goossens; S Vaerenberg; S Hopkins; B Catry; Dl Monnet; H Goossens; C Suetens Journal: Euro Surveill Date: 2012-11-15
Authors: Peter Davey; Erwin Brown; Esmita Charani; Lynda Fenelon; Ian M Gould; Alison Holmes; Craig R Ramsay; Philip J Wiffen; Mark Wilcox Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2013-04-30
Authors: Massimo Sartelli; Therese M Duane; Fausto Catena; Jeffrey M Tessier; Federico Coccolini; Lillian S Kao; Belinda De Simone; Francesco M Labricciosa; Addison K May; Luca Ansaloni; John E Mazuski Journal: Surg Infect (Larchmt) Date: 2016-11-09 Impact factor: 2.150
Authors: T M Rawson; L S P Moore; A M Tivey; A Tsao; M Gilchrist; E Charani; A H Holmes Journal: Antimicrob Resist Infect Control Date: 2017-01-13 Impact factor: 4.887
Authors: Timothy M Rawson; Thomas P Butters; Luke S P Moore; Enrique Castro-Sánchez; Fiona J Cooke; Alison H Holmes Journal: J Antimicrob Chemother Date: 2016-07-17 Impact factor: 5.790
Authors: Chuan Yok Ang; Jagjit Singh Dhaliwal; Siti Hanna Muharram; Muhammad Eid Akkawi; Zahid Hussain; Hanif Rahman; Yuh Yen Kok; Sachinjeet Kaur Sodhi Dhaliwal; Long Chiau Ming Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2021-07-07 Impact factor: 2.692