Laboratory-based versus population-based surveillance of antimicrobial resistance to inform empirical treatment for suspected urinary tract infection in Indonesia

Surveillance of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) enables monitoring of trends in AMR prevalence. WHO recommends laboratory-based surveillance to obtain actionable AMR data at local or national level. However, laboratory-based surveillance may lead to overestimation of the prevalence of AMR due to bias...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:PloS one 2020-03, Vol.15 (3), p.e0230489-e0230489
Main Authors: Sugianli, Adhi Kristianto, Ginting, Franciscus, Kusumawati, R Lia, Parwati, Ida, de Jong, Menno D, van Leth, Frank, Schultsz, Constance
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Ambulatory care facilities
Amikacin
Analysis
Antibacterial agents
Antibiotics
Antimicrobial agents
Antimicrobial resistance
Bias
Biology and Life Sciences
Care and treatment
Ceftriaxone
Confidence intervals
Drug resistance
E coli
Escherichia coli
Gynecology
Health aspects
Hospitals
Internal medicine
Klebsiella
Klebsiella pneumoniae
Laboratories
Malik, Adam
Medicine
Medicine and Health Sciences
Meropenem
Microbial drug resistance
Microbiology
Obstetrics
Patients
Piperacillin
Piperacillin-tazobactam
Pneumonia
Population
Prejudice
Research and Analysis Methods
Setting (Literature)
Studies
Surveillance
Surveillance systems
Tazobactam
Trends
Urinary tract
Urinary tract diseases
Urinary tract infections
Urine
Urogenital system
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Surveillance of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) enables monitoring of trends in AMR prevalence. WHO recommends laboratory-based surveillance to obtain actionable AMR data at local or national level. However, laboratory-based surveillance may lead to overestimation of the prevalence of AMR due to bias. The objective of this study is to assess the difference in resistance prevalence between laboratory-based and population-based surveillance (PBS) among uropathogens in Indonesia. We included all urine samples submitted to the laboratory growing Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae in the laboratory-based surveillance. Population-based surveillance data were collected in a cross-sectional survey of AMR in E. coli and K. pneumoniae isolated from urine samples among consecutive patients with symptoms of UTI, attending outpatient clinics and hospital wards. Data were collected between 1 April 2014 until 31 May 2015. The difference in percentage resistance (95% confidence intervals) between laboratory- and population-based surveillance was calculated for relevant antibiotics. A difference larger than +/- 5 percent points was defined as a biased result, precluding laboratory-based surveillance for guiding empirical treatment. We observed high prevalence of AMR ranging between 63.1% (piperacillin-tazobactam) and 85% (ceftriaxone) in laboratory-based surveillance and 41.3% (piperacillin-tazobactam) and 74.2% (ceftriaxone) in population-based surveillance, except for amikacin and meropenem (5.7%/9.8%; 10.8%/5.9%; [laboratory-/population-based surveillance], respectively). Laboratory-based surveillance yielded significantly higher AMR prevalence estimates than population-based surveillance. This difference was much larger when comparing surveillance data from outpatients than from inpatients. All point estimates of the difference between the two surveillance systems were larger than 5 percent points, except for amikacin and meropenem. Laboratory-based AMR surveillance of uropathogens, is not adequate to guide empirical treatment for community-based settings in Indonesia.
ISSN:1932-6203
1932-6203
DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0230489