Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28751488›Full record

ReviewBMJ open2017

Guideline recommendations and antimicrobial resistance: the need for a change.

Christelle Elias, Lorenzo Moja, Dominik Mertz, Mark Loeb, Gilles Forte, Nicola Magrini

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMJ open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

38 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Worldwide Prevalence ofPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Christelle EliasEssential Medicines and Health Products, WHO, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6962-161X
Lorenzo MojaEssential Medicines and Health Products, WHO, Geneva, Switzerland.
Dominik MertzMedicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada.
Mark LoebMedicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada.
Gilles ForteEssential Medicines and Health Products, WHO, Geneva, Switzerland.
Nicola MagriniEssential Medicines and Health Products, WHO, Geneva, Switzerland.

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesAntimicrobial resistance has become a global burden for which inappropriate antimicrobial use is an important contributing factor. Any decisions on the selection of antibiotics use should consider their effects on antimicrobial resistance. The objective of this study was to assess the extent to which antibiotic prescribing guidelines have considered resistance patterns when making recommendations for five highly prevalent infectious syndromes.

designWe used Medline searches complemented with extensive use of Web engine to identify guidelines on empirical treatment of community-acquired pneumonia, urinary tract infections, acute otitis media, rhinosinusitis and pharyngitis. We collected data on microbiology and resistance patterns and identified discrete pattern categories. We assessed the extent to which recommendations considered resistance, in addition to efficacy and safety, when recommending antibiotics.

resultsWe identified 135 guidelines, which reported a total of 251 recommendations. Most (103/135, 79%) were from developed countries. Community-acquired pneumonia was the syndrome mostly represented (51, 39%). In only 16 (6.4%) recommendations, selection of empirical antibiotic was discussed in relation to resistance and specific microbiological data. In a further 69 (27.5%) recommendations, references were made in relation to resistance, but the attempt was inconsistent. Across syndromes, 12 patterns of resistance with implications on recommendations were observed. 50% to 75% of recommendations did not attempt to set recommendation in the context of these patterns.

conclusionThere is consistent evidence that guidelines on empirical antibiotic use did not routinely consider resistance in their recommendations. Decision-makers should analyse and report the extent of local resistance patterns to allow better decision-making.

Indexed as

Drug Resistance, BacterialAnti-Bacterial AgentsCommunity-Acquired InfectionsGuideline AdherenceHumansPneumoniaPractice Guidelines as TopicPractice Patterns, Physicians'Anti-Bacterial AgentsInfection controlMICROBIOLOGYProtocols & guidelinesPublic healthTHERAPEUTICS

Identifiers

PMID28751488
PMCPMC5642659

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.