Suppr超能文献

政府干预减少人类抗生素使用的政策:系统评价和证据图谱。

Government policy interventions to reduce human antimicrobial use: A systematic review and evidence map.

机构信息

School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.

Global Strategy Lab, Dahdaleh Institute for Global Health Research, Faculty of Health and Osgoode Hall Law School, York University, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

出版信息

PLoS Med. 2019 Jun 11;16(6):e1002819. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002819. eCollection 2019 Jun.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Growing political attention to antimicrobial resistance (AMR) offers a rare opportunity for achieving meaningful action. Many governments have developed national AMR action plans, but most have not yet implemented policy interventions to reduce antimicrobial overuse. A systematic evidence map can support governments in making evidence-informed decisions about implementing programs to reduce AMR, by identifying, describing, and assessing the full range of evaluated government policy options to reduce antimicrobial use in humans.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

Seven databases were searched from inception to January 28, 2019, (MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, PAIS Index, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and PubMed). We identified studies that (1) clearly described a government policy intervention aimed at reducing human antimicrobial use, and (2) applied a quantitative design to measure the impact. We found 69 unique evaluations of government policy interventions carried out across 4 of the 6 WHO regions. These evaluations included randomized controlled trials (n = 4), non-randomized controlled trials (n = 3), controlled before-and-after designs (n = 7), interrupted time series designs (n = 25), uncontrolled before-and-after designs (n = 18), descriptive designs (n = 10), and cohort designs (n = 2). From these we identified 17 unique policy options for governments to reduce the human use of antimicrobials. Many studies evaluated public awareness campaigns (n = 17) and antimicrobial guidelines (n = 13); however, others offered different policy options such as professional regulation, restricted reimbursement, pay for performance, and prescription requirements. Identifying these policies can inform the development of future policies and evaluations in different contexts and health systems. Limitations of our study include the possible omission of unpublished initiatives, and that policies not evaluated with respect to antimicrobial use have not been captured in this review.

CONCLUSIONS

To our knowledge this is the first study to provide policy makers with synthesized evidence on specific government policy interventions addressing AMR. In the future, governments should ensure that AMR policy interventions are evaluated using rigorous study designs and that study results are published.

PROTOCOL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42017067514.

摘要

背景

对抗微生物药物耐药性(AMR)的关注度日益提高,这为采取有意义的行动提供了一个难得的机会。许多政府都制定了国家 AMR 行动计划,但大多数政府尚未实施政策干预措施来减少抗菌药物的过度使用。系统证据图谱可以通过确定、描述和评估旨在减少人类使用抗菌药物的各种经评估的政府政策选择,为政府在制定减少 AMR 的方案方面做出基于证据的决策提供支持。

方法和发现

从 2019 年 1 月 28 日开始,在 7 个数据库中进行了搜索(MEDLINE、CINAHL、EMBASE、PAIS Index、Cochrane 中央对照试验注册库、Web of Science 和 PubMed)。我们确定了明确描述了旨在减少人类抗菌药物使用的政府政策干预措施的研究,并且(2)采用了衡量影响的定量设计。我们发现,在 6 个世界卫生组织区域中的 4 个区域进行了 69 项独特的政府政策干预评估。这些评估包括随机对照试验(n = 4)、非随机对照试验(n = 3)、对照前后设计(n = 7)、中断时间序列设计(n = 25)、未对照前后设计(n = 18)、描述性设计(n = 10)和队列设计(n = 2)。从中,我们确定了政府减少人类使用抗菌药物的 17 种独特政策选择。许多研究评估了公众意识运动(n = 17)和抗菌药物指南(n = 13);然而,其他研究提供了不同的政策选择,如专业监管、限制报销、绩效付费和处方要求。确定这些政策可以为不同背景和卫生系统中的未来政策和评估提供信息。我们研究的局限性包括可能遗漏了未公布的举措,以及本综述未涵盖未针对抗菌药物使用进行评估的政策。

结论

据我们所知,这是第一项为政策制定者提供有关解决 AMR 的具体政府政策干预措施的综合证据的研究。未来,政府应确保使用严格的研究设计评估 AMR 政策干预措施,并确保公布研究结果。

注册协议

PROSPERO CRD42017067514。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验