Circumstances for treatment and control of invasive Enterobacterales infections in eight hospitals across sub-Saharan Africa: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND: Bloodstream infections caused by Enterobacterales show high frequency of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in many Low- and Middle-Income Countries. We aimed to describe the variation in circumstances for management of such resistant infections in a group of African public-sector hospitals participating in a major research study. METHODS: We gathered data from eight hospitals across sub-Saharan Africa to describe hospital services, infection prevention and antibiotic stewardship activities, using two WHO-generated tools. We collected monthly cross-sectional data on availability of antibiotics in the hospital pharmacies for bloodstream infections caused by Enterobacterales. We compared the availability of these antibiotics to actual patient-level use of antibiotics in confirmed Enterobacterales bloodstream infections (BSI). RESULTS: Hospital circumstances for institutional management of resistant BSI varied markedly. This included self-evaluated infection prevention level (WHO-IPCAF score: median 428, range 155 to 687.5) and antibiotic stewardship activities (WHO stewardship toolkit questions: median 14.5, range 2 to 23). These results did not correlate with national income levels. Across all sites, ceftriaxone and ciprofloxacin were the most consistently available antibiotic agents, followed by amoxicillin, co-amoxiclav, gentamicin and co-trimoxazole. There was substantial variation in the availability of some antibiotics, especially carbapenems, amikacin and piperacillin-tazobactam with degree of access linked to national income level. Investigators described out-of-pocket payments for access to additional antibiotics at 7/8 sites. The in-pharmacy availability of antibiotics correlated well with actual use of antibiotics for treating BSI patients. CONCLUSIONS: There was wide variation between these African hospitals for a range of important circumstances relating to treatment and control of severe bacterial infections, though these did not all correspond to national income level. For most antibiotics, patient-level use reflected in-hospital drug availability, suggesting external antibiotics supply was infrequent. Antimicrobial resistant bacterial infections could plausibly show different clinical impacts across sub-Saharan Africa due to this contextual variation

Circumstances for treatment and control of invasive Enterobacterales infections in eight hospitals across sub-Saharan Africa: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Bloodstream infections caused by Enterobacterales show high frequency of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in many Low- and Middle-Income Countries. We aimed to describe the variation in circumstances for management of such resistant infections in a group of African public-sector hospitals participating in a major research study. METHODS: We gathered data from eight hospitals across sub-Saharan Africa to describe hospital services, infection prevention and antibiotic stewardship activities, using two WHO-generated tools. We collected monthly cross-sectional data on availability of antibiotics in the hospital pharmacies for bloodstream infections caused by Enterobacterales. We compared the availability of these antibiotics to actual patient-level use of antibiotics in confirmed Enterobacterales bloodstream infections (BSI). RESULTS: Hospital circumstances for institutional management of resistant BSI varied markedly. This included self-evaluated infection prevention level (WHO-IPCAF score: median 428, range 155 to 687.5) and antibiotic stewardship activities (WHO stewardship toolkit questions: median 14.5, range 2 to 23). These results did not correlate with national income levels. Across all sites, ceftriaxone and ciprofloxacin were the most consistently available antibiotic agents, followed by amoxicillin, co-amoxiclav, gentamicin and co-trimoxazole. There was substantial variation in the availability of some antibiotics, especially carbapenems, amikacin and piperacillin-tazobactam with degree of access linked to national income level. Investigators described out-of-pocket payments for access to additional antibiotics at 7/8 sites. The in-pharmacy availability of antibiotics correlated well with actual use of antibiotics for treating BSI patients. CONCLUSIONS: There was wide variation between these African hospitals for a range of important circumstances relating to treatment and control of severe bacterial infections, though these did not all correspond to national income level. For most antibiotics, patient-level use reflected in-hospital drug availability, suggesting external antibiotics supply was infrequent. Antimicrobial resistant bacterial infections could plausibly show different clinical impacts across sub-Saharan Africa due to this contextual variation