Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Comparison of national antimicrobial treatment guidelines, African Union.
Craig, Jessica; Hiban, Kayli; Frost, Isabel; Kapoor, Geetanjali; Alimi, Yewande; Varma, Jay K.
Afiliação
  • Craig J; Center for Disease Dynamics, Economics & Policy, 5636 Connecticut Ave NW, Washington, DC 20015, United States of America.
  • Hiban K; Center for Disease Dynamics, Economics & Policy, 5636 Connecticut Ave NW, Washington, DC 20015, United States of America.
  • Frost I; Center for Disease Dynamics, Economics & Policy, New Delhi, India.
  • Kapoor G; Center for Disease Dynamics, Economics & Policy, New Delhi, India.
  • Alimi Y; Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
  • Varma JK; Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Bull World Health Organ ; 100(1): 50-59, 2022 Jan 01.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35017757
ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE:

To identify and compare antimicrobial treatment guidelines from African Union (AU) Member States.

METHODS:

We reviewed national government agency and public health institutes' websites and communicated with country or regional focal points to identify existing treatment guidelines from AU Member States. We included guidelines if they contained disease-, syndrome- or pathogen-specific treatment recommendations and if those recommendations included antimicrobial name or class, dosage and therapy duration. The scope of the review was limited to infections and clinical syndromes that often have a bacterial cause. We assessed treatment guidelines for alignment with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria. We compared treatment recommendations for various common bacterial infections or clinical syndromes described across national guidelines and those described in three World Health Organization guidelines.

FINDINGS:

We identified 31 treatment guidelines from 20 of the 55 (36%) AU Member States; several countries had more than one treatment guideline that met our inclusion criteria. Fifteen (48%) guidelines from 10 countries have been published or updated since 2015. Methods used to develop the guidelines were not well described. No guidelines were developed according to the GRADE approach. Antimicrobial selection, dosage and duration of recommended therapies varied widely across guidelines for all infections and syndromes.

CONCLUSION:

AU Member States lack antimicrobial treatment guidelines that meet internationally accepted methods and that draw from local evidence about disease burden and antimicrobial susceptibility.
Assuntos

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: União Africana / Antibacterianos Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: União Africana / Antibacterianos Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article