Study: Government policy interventions to fight antimicrobial resistance have not been rigorously evaluated

Governments have a wide variety of policy options at their disposal to respond to the growing threat of antimicrobial resistance, but many of these approaches have not been rigorously evaluated, according to a new study published this week in PLOS Medicine by Susan Rogers Van Katwyk of the University of Ottawa, Canada, and colleagues.

Study: Government policy interventions to fight antimicrobial resistance have not been rigorously evaluated
Credit: NIAID, Flickr

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is on the rise due to persistent misuse and overuse of antimicrobials, and has already rendered some infections untreatable with existing drugs. In the new work, researchers systematically searched seven global databases for studies that clearly described and evaluated a government policy intervention aimed at reducing human antimicrobial misuse. They identified 69 published evaluations of such interventions carried out around the world.

Described in these 69 studies were 17 different types of policies that governments have deployed and tested to reduce antimicrobial use, including public awareness campaigns, antimicrobial guidelines, vaccination, and tailored regulations for prescribing and reimbursement. Unfortunately, most existing policy options have not been rigorously evaluated, which limits their usefulness in planning future policy interventions. Of the studies, only 4 had a randomized controlled design, the gold standard for medical interventions, while 35 used rigorous quasi-experimental designs and the remaining 30 were uncontrolled and descriptive. The current systematic review was unable to directly investigate the impact of the different interventions on AMR, but reductions in antimicrobial use are likely to lead to lower levels of resistance over time.

“To avoid future waste of public resources, and in line with WHO recommendations for national action on AMR, governments should ensure that AMR policy interventions are evaluated using rigorous study designs and that study results are published,” the authors say.

Source:

PLOS

Journal reference:

Taljaard, M. et al. (2019) Government policy interventions to reduce human antimicrobial use: A systematic review and evidence map. PLOS Medicine. doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1002819.

Citations

Please use one of the following formats to cite this article in your essay, paper or report:

  • APA

    PLOS ONE. (2019, June 12). Study: Government policy interventions to fight antimicrobial resistance have not been rigorously evaluated. News-Medical. Retrieved on April 16, 2024 from https://www.news-medical.net/news/20190612/Study-Government-policy-interventions-to-fight-antimicrobial-resistance-have-not-been-rigorously-evaluated.aspx.

  • MLA

    PLOS ONE. "Study: Government policy interventions to fight antimicrobial resistance have not been rigorously evaluated". News-Medical. 16 April 2024. <https://www.news-medical.net/news/20190612/Study-Government-policy-interventions-to-fight-antimicrobial-resistance-have-not-been-rigorously-evaluated.aspx>.

  • Chicago

    PLOS ONE. "Study: Government policy interventions to fight antimicrobial resistance have not been rigorously evaluated". News-Medical. https://www.news-medical.net/news/20190612/Study-Government-policy-interventions-to-fight-antimicrobial-resistance-have-not-been-rigorously-evaluated.aspx. (accessed April 16, 2024).

  • Harvard

    PLOS ONE. 2019. Study: Government policy interventions to fight antimicrobial resistance have not been rigorously evaluated. News-Medical, viewed 16 April 2024, https://www.news-medical.net/news/20190612/Study-Government-policy-interventions-to-fight-antimicrobial-resistance-have-not-been-rigorously-evaluated.aspx.

Comments

The opinions expressed here are the views of the writer and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of News Medical.
Post a new comment
Post

While we only use edited and approved content for Azthena answers, it may on occasions provide incorrect responses. Please confirm any data provided with the related suppliers or authors. We do not provide medical advice, if you search for medical information you must always consult a medical professional before acting on any information provided.

Your questions, but not your email details will be shared with OpenAI and retained for 30 days in accordance with their privacy principles.

Please do not ask questions that use sensitive or confidential information.

Read the full Terms & Conditions.

You might also like...
Human genetics evidence predictive of drug development success, study shows