RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Antibiotic prophylaxis to prevent brucellosis after accidental exposure to Brucella is an important topic in public health. This study aimed to systematically review the efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis following accidental exposure to Brucella in preventing human brucellosis disease. METHODS: The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023456812). The outcomes included the incidence of brucellosis disease, adverse events rate, and antibiotic prophylaxis adherence. A comprehensive literature search, conducted until 20 November, 2023, involved Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, and LILACS databases. Descriptive analysis and meta-analysis using R software were performed, risk of bias was assessed using JBI Critical appraisal tools, and certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE tool. RESULTS: Among 3102 initially identified records, eight studies involving 97 individuals accidentally exposed, all focused on high-risk accidental exposure to Brucella in laboratory settings, were included in the review. All studies reported the prophylactic treatment comprising doxycycline at a dosage of 100 mg twice daily, combined with rifampicin at 600 mg, both administered over 21 days. Prophylaxis adherence was reported in 86% of cases, and incidence of brucellosis post-treatment was 0.01. Adverse events, mainly gastrointestinal, occurred in 26% of cases. Critical appraisal revealed limitations in reporting demographics and clinical information. The certainty of evidence was rated as 'very low,' emphasising the need for caution in interpreting the observed outcomes due to study design constraints and the absence of comparative groups. CONCLUSIONS: PEP is an alternative practice reported in the literature, used in accidents with high-risk exposure to Brucella. The currently available evidence of the efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis is insufficient to support a recommendation for or against the widespread use of antibiotic prophylaxis, so caution is needed in interpreting results due to the very low certainty of evidence, primarily stemming from case series and lack of comparative groups.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Miltefosine is a new drug that was recently approved for the treatment of tegumentary leishmaniasis (TL) by the Brazilian health system. It has a teratogenic potential and requires follow-up of patients undergoing treatment. Improving compliance with best practices is essential to ensure the safe and appropriate use of this drug. OBJECTIVE: This project aimed to implement best practices for the safe and appropriate use of miltefosine in the treatment of TL in the state of Minas Gerais, Brazil. METHODS: This project was guided by the JBI Evidence Implementation Framework. Five best practice criteria were established based on the best available evidence. A baseline audit was conducted to measure current practice against best practice. Barriers to best practice were then identified and a follow-up audit was conducted to evaluate changes after the implementation of improvement strategies. Two sites were analyzed: a leishmaniasis reference service in Belo Horizonte, the capital of Minas Gerais, and the 28 regional offices. RESULTS: The baseline audit evaluated data from 197 miltefosine requests distributed across 13 regional sites. All requests from the reference service were compliant (100%). This is in contrast to the 60% compliance rate at the regional offices. The improvement strategies included intensifying direct communication with the regional health professionals, which increased the average compliance rate to 79.5%, 6 months after the interventions were introduced. CONCLUSION: This best practice implementation project effectively increased the compliance rate for the audited procedures. Communication from the reference site with the regional health professionals successfully increased compliance with best practices and promoted the safe and appropriate use of miltefosine. These strategies should analyzed and applied to improve other programs. SPANISH ABSTRACT: http://links.lww.com/IJEBH/A184.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: To evaluate the performance of the Cutaneous Leishmaniasis Impact Questionnaire (CLIQ) using the EuroQol-5 Dimension (EQ-5D-3L) as a reference standard (criterion validation); to evaluate the responsiveness of the instruments and estimate a cut-off point for the CLIQ to be able to discriminate between high and low impacts of cutaneous leishmaniasis on patients. METHODS: Between 2020 and 2022, a longitudinal validation study was conducted at a reference centre for leishmaniasis in Brazil. The EQ-5D-3L and CLIQ questionnaires were administered before, during and after treatment for cutaneous leishmaniasis. The correlation between the instruments was assessed using Spearman's correlation coefficient, responsiveness was assessed using the Wilcoxon test, and CLIQ cut-off points were proposed based on results of the EQ-5Q-3L, dichotomized between patients reporting no problems' and 'some or extreme problems'. RESULTS: There were satisfactory correlation coefficients between the two instruments before (-0.596) and during treatment (-0.551) and a low correlation between the instruments after the end of treatment (-0.389). In general, the responsiveness of the instruments was satisfactory. The CLIC scores that maximized sensitivity and specificity for recognizing impaired health status before and during treatment were 7 points and 17 points, respectively. However, at the end of treatment, based on the results for the EQ-5D-3L, the CLIC was not able to discriminate between individuals with high and low impacts of the disease. CONCLUSION: The CLIQ corresponds well with the EQ-5D-3L when applied before and during treatment but does not seem to be appropriate for follow-up evaluations after the end of treatment.