Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38621513›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of hospital infection2024

Assessment of antimicrobial resistance laboratory-based surveillance capacity of hospitals in Zambia: findings and implications for system strengthening.

K Yamba, J Y Chizimu, S Mudenda, C Lukwesa, R Chanda, R Nakazwe, B Simunyola, M Shawa, A C Kalungia, D Chanda and 13 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of hospital infection, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

23 authors.

K YambaAntimicrobial Resistance Coordinating Committee Unit, Zambia National Public Health Institute, Lusaka, Zambia.
J Y ChizimuAntimicrobial Resistance Coordinating Committee Unit, Zambia National Public Health Institute, Lusaka, Zambia. Electronic address: chizimuyjoseph@yahoo.com.
S MudendaDepartment of Pharmacy, School of Health Sciences, University of Zambia, Lusaka, Zambia.
C LukwesaDepartment of Health, Lusaka District Health Office, Lusaka, Zambia.
R ChandaDepartment of Pathology and Microbiology, University Teaching Hospitals, Lusaka, Zambia.
R NakazweDepartment of Pathology and Microbiology, University Teaching Hospitals, Lusaka, Zambia.
B SimunyolaDepartment of Pharmacy, Ministry of Health, Lusaka, Zambia.
M ShawaHokudai Center for Zoonosis Control in Zambia, Hokkaido University International Institute for Zoonosis Control, Lusaka, Zambia.
A C KalungiaDepartment of Pharmacy, School of Health Sciences, University of Zambia, Lusaka, Zambia.
D ChandaDepartment of Internal Medicine, University Teaching Hospitals, Lusaka, Zambia.
T MateeleDepartment of Internal Medicine, Levy Mwanawasa University Teaching Hospital, Lusaka, Zambia.
J ThapaDivision of Bioresources, Hokkaido University International Institute for Zoonosis Control, Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan.
K KapoloweDepartment of Internal Medicine, University Teaching Hospitals, Lusaka, Zambia.
M L MazabaAntimicrobial Resistance Coordinating Committee Unit, Zambia National Public Health Institute, Lusaka, Zambia.
M MpunduAction on Antibiotic Resistance (ReAct) Africa, Lusaka, Zambia.
F MasaningaDepartment of Health, World Health Organization, Lusaka, Zambia.
K AzamStrengthening Pandemic Preparedness, Eastern and Southern Africa Health Community, Arusha, Tanzania.
C NakajimaDivision of Bioresources, Hokkaido University International Institute for Zoonosis Control, Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan; International Collaboration Unit, Hokkaido University International Institute for Zoonosis Control, Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan; Division of Research Support, Hokkaido University Institute for Vaccine Research and Development, Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan.
Y SuzukiDivision of Bioresources, Hokkaido University International Institute for Zoonosis Control, Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan; International Collaboration Unit, Hokkaido University International Institute for Zoonosis Control, Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan; Division of Research Support, Hokkaido University Institute for Vaccine Research and Development, Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan.
N N BakyaitaDepartment of Health, World Health Organization, Lusaka, Zambia.
E WesangulaStrengthening Pandemic Preparedness, Eastern and Southern Africa Health Community, Arusha, Tanzania.
M MatuStrengthening Pandemic Preparedness, Eastern and Southern Africa Health Community, Arusha, Tanzania.
R ChilengiAntimicrobial Resistance Coordinating Committee Unit, Zambia National Public Health Institute, Lusaka, Zambia.

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA well-established antimicrobial resistance (AMR) laboratory-based surveillance (LBS) is of utmost importance in a country like Zambia which bears a significant proportion of the world's communicable disease burden. This study assessed the capacity of laboratories in selected hospitals to conduct AMR surveillance in Zambia.

methodsThis cross-sectional exploratory study was conducted among eight purposively selected hospitals in Zambia between August 2023 and December 2023. Data were collected using the self-scoring Laboratory Assessment of Antibiotic Resistance Testing Capacity (LAARC) tool.

findingsOf the assessed facilities, none had full capacity to conduct AMR surveillance with varying capacities ranging from moderate (63% (5/8)) to low (38% (3/8)). Some of the barriers of AMR-LBS were the lack of an electronic laboratory information system (63% (5/8)) and the lack of locally generated antibiograms (75% (6/8)). Quality control for antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST), pathogen identification and media preparation had the lowest overall score among all of the facilities with a score of 14%, 20% and 44%, respectively. The highest overall scores were in specimen processing (79%), data management (78%), specimen collection, transport and management (71%), and safety (70%). Most facilities had standard operating procedures in place but lacked specimen-specific standard operating procedures.

conclusionThe absence of laboratories with full capacity to conduct AMR surveillance hinders efforts to combat AMR and further complicates the treatment outcomes of infectious diseases. Establishing and strengthening LBS systems are essential in quantifying the burden of AMR and supporting the development of local antibiograms and treatment guidelines.

Indexed as

HospitalsAnti-Bacterial AgentsCross-Sectional StudiesDrug Resistance, BacterialEpidemiological MonitoringHumansMicrobial Sensitivity TestsZambiaAnti-Bacterial AgentsAntimicrobial resistanceAntimicrobial stewardshipLaboratory capacitySurveillanceZambia

Identifiers

PMID38621513
PMCPMC11171463

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.