Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33280049›Full record

SynthesisThe Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy2020

Linking antimicrobial resistance surveillance to antibiotic policy in healthcare settings: the COMBACTE-Magnet EPI-Net COACH project.

Maria Diletta Pezzani, Fulvia Mazzaferri, Monica Compri, Liliana Galia, Nico T Mutters, Gunnar Kahlmeter, Theoklis E Zaoutis, Mitchell J Schwaber, Jesús Rodríguez-Baño, Stephan Harbarth and 2 more

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Multidrug-ResistantInfection and drug resistance · 2025
    Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
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

12 authors.

Maria Diletta PezzaniInfectious Diseases Section, Department of Diagnostic and Public Health, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.
Fulvia MazzaferriInfectious Diseases Section, Department of Diagnostic and Public Health, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.
Monica CompriInfectious Diseases Section, Department of Diagnostic and Public Health, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.
Liliana GaliaInfectious Diseases Section, Department of Diagnostic and Public Health, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.
Nico T MuttersBonn University Hospital, Institute for Hygiene and Public Health, Bonn, Germany.
Gunnar KahlmeterDepartment of Clinical Microbiology, Växjö Central Hospital, Växjö, Sweden.
Theoklis E ZaoutisPerelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Infectious Diseases Division, The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Mitchell J SchwaberNational Centre for Infection Control, Israel Ministry of Health and Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.
Jesús Rodríguez-BañoDivision of Infectious Diseases, Microbiology and Preventive Medicine, Hospital Universitario Virgen Macarena/Department of Medicine, University of Seville/Biomedicine Institute of Seville (IBiS), Seville, Spain.
Stephan HarbarthInfection Control Program, World Health Organization Collaborating Centre on Patient Safety, Geneva University Hospitals and Faculty of Medicine, Geneva, Switzerland.
Evelina TacconelliInfectious Diseases Section, Department of Diagnostic and Public Health, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.
COACH working group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo systematically summarize the evidence on how to collect, analyse and report antimicrobial resistance (AMR) surveillance data to inform antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) teams providing guidance on empirical antibiotic treatment in healthcare settings.

methodsThe research group identified 10 key questions about the link between AMR surveillance and AMS using a checklist of 9 elements for good practice in health research priority settings and a modified 3D combined approach matrix, and conducted a systematic review of published original studies and guidelines on the link between AMR surveillance and AMS.

resultsThe questions identified focused on AMS team composition; minimum infrastructure requirements for AMR surveillance; organisms, samples and susceptibility patterns to report; data stratification strategies; reporting frequency; resistance thresholds to drive empirical therapy; surveillance in high-risk hospital units, long-term care, outpatient and veterinary settings; and surveillance data from other countries. Twenty guidelines and seven original studies on the implementation of AMR surveillance as part of an AMS programme were included in the literature review.

conclusionsThe evidence summarized in this review provides a useful basis for a more integrated process of developing procedures to report AMR surveillance data to drive AMS interventions. These procedures should be extended to settings outside the acute-care institutions, such as long-term care, outpatient and veterinary. Without proper AMR surveillance, implementation of AMS policies cannot contribute effectively to the fight against MDR pathogens and may even worsen the burden of adverse events from such interventions.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsDrug Resistance, BacterialDelivery of Health CareHumansMagnetsPolicyAnti-Bacterial Agents

Identifiers

PMID33280049
PMCPMC7719409

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.