Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
2.
Antimicrob Resist Infect Control ; 12(1): 70, 2023 07 14.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37452389

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Vaccination can prevent bacterial and viral infections that could otherwise increase the chances of receiving (unnecessary) antibiotic treatment(s). As a result, vaccination may provide an important public health intervention to control antimicrobial resistance (AMR). OBJECTIVES: Perform a systematic literature review to better understand the impact of influenza, pneumococcal and COVID-19 vaccination on antibiotic use, and to identify differences in effect between world regions and study designs. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature review and meta-analysis which updated previous literature reviews with new data from 1 October 2018 to 1 December 2021. The study focuses on randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies. Results from the meta-analysis of RCTs were stratified by WHO region and age group. Vote counting based on the direction of effect was applied to synthesize the results of the observational studies. RESULTS: Most studies are performed in the WHO European Region and the Region of the Americas in high-income countries. RCTs show that the effect of influenza vaccination on the number of antibiotic prescriptions or days of antibiotic use (Ratio of Means (RoM) 0.71, 95% CI 0.62-0.83) is stronger compared to the effect of pneumococcal vaccination (RoM 0.92, 95% CI 0.85-1.00). These studies also confirm a reduction in the proportion of people receiving antibiotics after influenza vaccination (Risk Ratio (RR) 0.63, 95% CI 0.51-0.79). The effect of influenza vaccination in the European and American regions ranged from RoM 0.63 and 0.87 to RR 0.70 and 0.66, respectively. The evidence from observational studies supports these findings but presents a less consistent picture. No COVID-19 studies were identified. CONCLUSION: We find that both RCTs and observational studies show that influenza vaccination significantly reduces antibiotic use, while the effect of pneumococcal vaccination is less pronounced. We were unable to study the effect of COVID-19 vaccination and no clear regional patterns were found due to the high heterogeneity between studies. Overall, our data supports the use of influenza vaccination as an important public health intervention to reduce antibiotic use and possibly control AMR.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Influenza Humana , Viroses , Humanos , Influenza Humana/prevenção & controle , Influenza Humana/tratamento farmacológico , Antibacterianos/uso terapêutico , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Vacinação
3.
Global Health ; 18(1): 85, 2022 10 17.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36253789

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Vaccination can reduce antibiotic use by decreasing bacterial and viral infections and vaccines are highlighted in the WHO Global Action Plan on Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR) as an infection prevention measure to reduce AMR. Our study aimed to analyze whether WHO Member States have developed AMR national action plans that are aligned with the Global Action Plan regarding objectives on vaccination. METHODS: We reviewed 77 out of 90 AMR national action plans available in the WHO library that were written after publication of the Global Action Plan in 2015. Each plan was analyzed using content analysis, with a focus on vaccination and key components as defined by WHO (I. Strategic plan (e.g. goals and objectives), II. Operational plan, III. Monitoring and Evaluation plan). RESULTS: Vaccination was included in 67 of 77 AMR plans (87%) across all WHO Regions (Africa: n = 13/13, the Eastern Mediterranean: n = 15/16, Europe: n = 10/14, the Americas: n = 8/8, South-East Asia: n = 8/11, and the Western Pacific: n = 13/15). Pneumococcal and influenza vaccination were most frequently highlighted (n = 12 and n = 11). We found indications that vaccination objectives are more often included in AMR plans from higher income countries, while lower income countries more often include specific vaccines. The key WHO components of national action plans were frequently not covered (I. 47% included, II. 57%, III. 40%). In total, 33 countries (43%) included indicators (e.g. strategic objectives) to capture the role of vaccines against AMR. CONCLUSIONS: While vaccination to reduce AMR is seen as an important global public health issue by WHO, there appears to be a gap in its adoption in national AMR plans. Country income levels seem to influence the progress, implementation and focus of national action plans, guided by a lack of funding and prioritization in developing countries. To better align the global response to AMR, our review suggests there is a need to update national action plans to include objectives on vaccination with more focus on specific vaccines that impact antibiotic use.


Assuntos
Antibacterianos , Farmacorresistência Bacteriana , Antibacterianos/uso terapêutico , Humanos , Vacinas Pneumocócicas , Saúde Pública , Vacinação
4.
BMC Nurs ; 19: 50, 2020.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32536812

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Carriers of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) experience a variety of personal and social consequences, despite the asymptomatic nature of carriage. Some of these consequences are inherent to the application in practice of strict infection prevention guidelines. However, the experiences of nurses carrying MRSA have not been documented. This study aimed to describe the experiences of nurses carrying MRSA to get insight into the impact of MRSA carriage on nurses in a country with a "search-and-destroy" policy for MRSA. METHODS: A qualitative study was conducted among eighteen nurses who experienced MRSA carriage and were working in healthcare organizations in the Netherlands (e.g. hospitals, nursing homes and home care). Semi-structured interviews were conducted using an interview guide. The interviews were audio tape recorded, transcribed and analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: MRSA carriage has an impact on the life of nurses during four distinct phases: becoming aware of carrying MRSA, processing information and guidance, experiencing consequences of carriage and, when applicable, a life after eradication of MRSA. Each phase was found to be associated with negative consequences. The impact of MRSA carriage on the daily life of nurses is mostly influenced by the experience of consequences of MRSA carriage - including a ban to work with patients, eradication treatment with antibiotics, and social isolation from others - despite the asymptomatic nature of MRSA carriage itself. In addition, lack of information and guidance increased the impact of carriage. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows nurses experience various consequences of MRSA carriage, despite the asymptomatic nature of carriage. The work ban, eradication treatment and social isolation influenced the nurses' work-related future, personal health and social environment. The impact of carriage may be reduced by clear information and guidance, and support from others. Therefore, sufficient information and guidance needs to be given to MRSA carriers by healthcare organizations.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...