Barriers and enablers to blood culture sampling in Indonesia, Thailand and Viet Nam: a Theoretical Domains Framework-based survey.

OBJECTIVE: Blood culture (BC) sampling is recommended for all suspected sepsis patients prior to antibiotic administration. We examine barriers and enablers to BC sampling in three Southeast Asian countries. DESIGN: A Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF)-based survey, comprising a case scenario of a patient presenting with community-acquired sepsis and all 14 TDF domains of barriers/enablers to BC sampling. SETTING: Hospitals in Indonesia, Thailand and Viet Nam, December 2021 to 30 April 2022. PARTICIPANTS: 1070 medical doctors and 238 final-year medical students were participated in this study. Half of the respondents were women (n=680, 52%) and most worked in governmental hospitals (n=980, 75.4%). OUTCOME MEASURES: Barriers and enablers to BC sampling. RESULTS: The proportion of respondents who answered that they would definitely take BC in the case scenario was highest at 89.8% (273/304) in Thailand, followed by 50.5% (252/499) in Viet Nam and 31.3% (157/501) in Indonesia (p<0.001). Barriers/enablers in nine TDF domains were considered key in influencing BC sampling, including 'priority of BC (TDF-goals)', 'perception about their role to order or initiate an order for BC (TDF-social professional role and identity)', 'perception that BC is helpful (TDF-beliefs about consequences)', 'intention to follow guidelines (TDF-intention)', 'awareness of guidelines (TDF-knowledge)', 'norms of BC sampling (TDF-social influence)', 'consequences that discourage BC sampling (TDF-reinforcement)', 'perceived cost-effectiveness of BC (TDF-environmental context and resources)' and 'regulation on cost reimbursement (TDF-behavioural regulation)'. There was substantial heterogeneity between the countries. In most domains, the lower (higher) proportion of Thai respondents experienced the barriers (enablers) compared with that of Indonesian and Vietnamese respondents. A range of suggested intervention types and policy options was identified. CONCLUSIONS: Barriers and enablers to BC sampling are varied and heterogenous. Cost-related barriers are more common in more resource-limited countries, while many barriers are not directly related to cost. Context-specific multifaceted interventions at both hospital and policy levels are required to improve diagnostic stewardship practices.

Global knowledge gaps on antimicrobial resistance in the human health sector: A scoping review.

OBJECTIVES: To identify and summarize existing global knowledge gaps on antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in human health, focusing on the World Health Organization (WHO) bacterial priority pathogens, Mycobacterium tuberculosis, and selected fungi. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review of gray and peer-reviewed literature, published in English from January 2012 through December 2021, that reported on the prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and care of drug-resistant infections. We extracted relevant knowledge gaps and, through an iterative process, consolidated those into thematic research questions. RESULTS: Of 8409 publications screened, 1156 were included, including 225 (19.5%) from low- and middle-income countries. A total of 2340 knowledge gaps were extracted, in the following areas: antimicrobial research and development, AMR burden and drivers, resistant tuberculosis, antimicrobial stewardship, diagnostics, infection prevention and control, antimicrobial consumption and use data, immunization, sexually transmitted infections, AMR awareness and education, policies and regulations, fungi, water sanitation and hygiene, and foodborne diseases. The knowledge gaps were consolidated into 177 research questions, including 78 (44.1%) specifically relevant to low- and middle-income countries and 65 (36.7%) targeting vulnerable populations. CONCLUSION: This scoping review presents the most comprehensive compilation of AMR-related knowledge gaps to date, informing a priority-setting exercise to develop the WHO Global AMR Research Agenda for the human health sector.

Developing a priority global research agenda for antimicrobial resistance in the human health sector: protocol for a scoping review.

INTRODUCTION: To accelerate the response to the public health threat by antimicrobial resistance (AMR), the WHO is developing a Global Research Agenda for AMR in the human health sector that aims to provide a global and transparent assessment of priority knowledge gaps related to critical bacteria-including Mycobacterium tuberculosis-and fungi that inform control and response strategies to tackle AMR by 2030. A literature scoping review represents the first phase in a stepwise process, and we hereby outline the protocol to review current knowledge gaps and research questions on AMR in the human health sector. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This literature scoping review will follow the Arksey and O'Malley (2005) methodology and will include: (1) a hand search to identify relevant WHO guidelines and documents suggested by the WHO Steering Group for the AMR Global Research Agenda; (2) a grey literature search through a stakeholder mapping process and google searches of organisational websites; (3) a systematic search of relevant systematic reviews through bibliographic databases (PubMed, Embase and Web of Science); (4) screening of the reference lists of included studies. We will include relevant publications from the last 10 years (January 2012 to December 2021). Two researchers separately will review the yielded citations to determine eligibility based on predefined criteria. Relevant research questions with attributes will be extracted using a tool developed through an iterative process by the research team. Each identified research question will be classified and aggregated according to a conceptual framework (ie, 'knowledge matrix'), composed of three themes (ie, Prevention, Diagnosis and Care & Treatment) and four cross-cutting domains (ie, Descriptive, Discovery, Development, Delivery). We will present numerical and thematic summaries of the knowledge matrix. A qualitative content analysis is out of the scope of this protocol. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The scoping review process will only involve identification, selection and analysis of documents available for use in the public domain, and will not include any personal information on individuals, therefore ethical approval is not required. The findings will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed publication and stakeholder meetings.