Antibiotic resistance trends of ESKAPE pathogens in Kwazulu-Natal, South Africa: A five-year retrospective analysis.

BACKGROUND: To combat antimicrobial resistance, the World Health Organization developed a global priority pathogen list of antibiotic-resistant bacteria for prioritisation of research and development of new, effective antibiotics. OBJECTIVE: This study describes a five-year resistance trend analysis of the ESKAPE pathogens: Enterococcus faecium, Staphylococcus aureus, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Acinetobacter baumannii, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Enterobacter spp., from Kwazulu-Natal, South Africa. METHODS: This retrospective study used National Health Laboratory Services data on 64 502 ESKAPE organisms isolated between 2011 and 2015. Susceptibility trends were ascertained from minimum inhibitory concentrations and interpreted using Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute guidelines. RESULTS: S. aureus was most frequently isolated (n = 24, 495, 38%), followed by K. pneumoniae (n = 14, 282, 22%). Decreasing rates of methicillin-resistant S. aureus (28% to 18%, p 70%). CONCLUSION: This study describes the magnitude of antimicrobial resistance in KwaZulu-Natal and provides a South African perspective on antimicrobial resistance in the global priority pathogen list, signalling the need for initiation or enhancement of antimicrobial stewardship and infection control measures locally

Antimicrobial resistance and antimicrobial stewardship in South Africa: a survey of healthcare workers in academic and nonacademic hospitals

Abstract Objective: Antimicrobial stewardship programmes (ASPs) facilitate appropriate antimicrobial use and require contextualization for optimal functioning. We aimed to investigate perceptions of and antimicrobial resistance (AMR) and ASPs among healthcare workers in academic and nonacademic hospitals. Design: Cross-sectional survey. Setting: Three academic (Charlotte Maxeke Johannesburg Academic, Inkosi Albert Luthuli, Tygerberg) and three nonacademic hospitals (Leratong, Prince Mshiyeni Memorial, and Paarl) in South Africa from January to June 2022. Participants: Doctors, nurses, and pharmacists. Methods: Voluntary questionnaire using Google Forms, encompassing AMR, ASPs, and selected discipline-specific components. Results: Participants comprised 79 doctors (50 academic), 178 nurses (169 academic), and 21 pharmacists (18 academic) and were female predominant. AMR was a problem in academic hospitals (74.7% vs 51.2%, p 0.004); 73.5% overall reported inappropriate antimicrobial use as a major contributor. Adequate education on antimicrobials occurred in only 36.4% overall. Microbiological testing guided therapy more often in nonacademic settings (80.0% vs 50.2%, p <0.001). In both settings, antimicrobial availability drove selection in 48.2%. Overall, ASPs improved patient care (89.8%) and reduced antimicrobial use (86.9%), although felt to override prescriber autonomy in academic settings (29.4% vs 7.5%, p 0.007), mainly among nurses. Only 50.2% reported successful local ASPs. A minority of pharmacists (20.0%) reported sufficient hospital support for ASPs. Education, involvement of infection control staff, and inclusion of nurses in ASPs were most impactful on AMR. Conclusion: Selected healthcare worker perspectives differ by category and setting and can be targeted to improve ASPs. Further studies should target a higher number of clinical staff in both settings

Antimicrobial Stewardship in Public-Sector Hospitals in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a serious global public-health threat. Evidence suggests that antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) is a valuable tool to facilitate rational antibiotic use within healthcare facilities. A cross-sectional situational analysis using a questionnaire was conducted to determine the current status of antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) activities in all public-sector hospitals in KwaZulu-Natal (KZN). The survey had a 79% (57, N = 72) response rate. A total of 75% of hospitals had an antimicrobial stewardship committee (AMSC), 47% (20, N = 43) had a formal written statement of support from leadership, and 7% (3, N = 43) had budgeted financial support. Only 37% (16, N = 43) had on-site or off-site support from a clinical microbiologist, and 5% (2, N = 43) had an on-site infectious disease (ID) physician. Microbiologist input on pathogen surveillance data (aOR: 5.12; 95% CI: 4.08&ndash;22.02; p-value = 0.001) and microbiological investigations prior to the commencement of antibiotics (aOR: 5.12; 95% CI: 1.08&ndash;42.01; p-value = 0.041) were significantly associated with having either on- or off-site microbiology support. Respondents that had a representative from microbiology on the AMSC were significantly associated with having and interrogating facility-specific antibiograms (P = 0.051 and P = 0.036, respectively). Those facilities that had access to a microbiologist were significantly associated with producing an antibiogram (aOR: 4.80; 95% CI: 1.25&ndash;18.42; p-value = 0.022). Facilities with an ID physician were significantly associated with having a current antibiogram distributed to prescribers within the facility (P = 0.010) and significantly associated with sending prescribers personalized communication regarding improving prescribing (P = 0.044). Common challenges reported by the facilities included suboptimal hospital management support; a lack of clinicians, pharmacists, nurses, microbiologists, and dedicated time; the lack of a multidisciplinary approach; low clinician buy-in; inadequate training; a lack of printed antibiotic guidelines; and financial restrictions for microbiological investigations. The survey identified the need for financial, IT, and management support. Microbiology and infectious disease physicians were recognized as scarce human resources