Evidence mapPaperPMID 33633461Full record

ReviewInternational journal of general medicine2021

Key Issues Surrounding Appropriate Antibiotic Use for Prevention of Surgical Site Infections in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Narrative Review and the Implications.

Julius C Mwita, Olayinka O Ogunleye, Adesola Olalekan, Aubrey C Kalungia, Amanj Kurdi, Zikria Saleem, Jacqueline Sneddon, Brian Godman

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of general medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 48 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
48citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
7.5field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

48 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 74 citations in OpenAlex.

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

8 authors at 8 institutions in 8 countries.

Julius C MwitaDepartment of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Botswana, Gaborone, Botswana.ORCID 0000-0002-5947-3684
Olayinka O OgunleyeDepartment of Pharmacology, Therapeutics and Toxicology, Lagos State University College of Medicine, Lagos, Nigeria.ORCID 0000-0002-8921-1909
Adesola OlalekanDepartment of Medical Laboratory Science, University of Lagos, Lagos, Nigeria.ORCID 0000-0002-9203-8801
Aubrey C KalungiaDepartment of Pharmacy, University of Zambia, Lusaka, Zambia.ORCID 0000-0003-2554-1236
Amanj KurdiStrathclyde Institute of Pharmacy and Biomedical Sciences, Strathclyde University, Glasgow, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5036-1988
Zikria SaleemDepartment of Pharmacy Practice, Faculty of Pharmacy, The University of Lahore, Lahore, Pakistan.ORCID 0000-0003-3202-6347
Jacqueline SneddonHealthcare Improvement Scotland, Glasgow, UK.
Brian GodmanStrathclyde Institute of Pharmacy and Biomedical Sciences, Strathclyde University, Glasgow, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6539-6972
Hawler Medical University · IQHealthcare Improvement Scotland · GBLagos State University · NGUniversiti Sains Malaysia · MYUniversity of Botswana · BWUniversity of Lagos · NGUniversity of Lahore · PKUniversity of Zambia · ZM

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is a concern with the growing use of antimicrobials across countries increasing antimicrobial resistance (AMR) rates. A key area within hospitals is their use for the prevention of surgical site infections (SSI) with concerns with timing of the first dose, which can appreciably impact on effectiveness, as well as duration with extended prophylaxis common among low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). This is a concern as extended duration increases utilization rates and AMR as well as adverse events. Consequently, there is a need to document issues of timing and duration of surgical antibiotic prophylaxis (SAP) among LMICs together with potential ways forward to address current concerns.

methodsNarrative review of timings and duration of SAP among LMICs combined with publications documenting successful approaches to improve SAP to provide future direction to all key stakeholder groups.

resultsThere were documented concerns with the timing of the first dose of antibiotics, with appropriate timing as low as 6.7% in Egypt, although as high as 81.9% in Turkey. There was also an extensive duration of SAP, ranging from long duration times in all patients in a study in Nigeria with a mean of 8.7 days and 97% of patients in Egypt to 42.9% of patients in Pakistan and 35% in Turkey. Successful interventions to improve SAP typically involved multiple approaches including education of all key stakeholder groups, monitoring of usage against agreed guidelines,as well as quality targets. Multiple approaches typically improved timing and duration as well as reduced costs. For instance, in one study appropriateness increased from 30.1% to 91.4%, prolonged duration reduced to 5.7% of patients, and mean costs of antibiotics decreased 11-fold.

conclusionThere are considerable concerns with the timing and duration of SAP among LMICs. Multiple interventions among LMICs can address this providing future directions.

Indexed as

antibiotic prophylaxisduration of prophylaxisLMICsquality indicatorssurgical site infectionstiming of prophylaxis

Identifiers

PMID33633461
PMCPMC7901404
OpenAlexW3123357468

What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.