28
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Antibiotic stories: a mixed-methods, multi-country analysis of household antibiotic use in Malawi, Uganda and Zimbabwe

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          As concerns about the prevalence of infections that are resistant to available antibiotics increase, attention has turned toward the use of these medicines both within and outside of formal healthcare settings. Much of what is known about use beyond formal settings is informed by survey-based research. Few studies to date have used comparative, mixed-methods approaches to render visible patterns of use within and between settings as well as wider points of context shaping these patterns.

          Design

          This article analyses findings from mixed-methods anthropological studies of antibiotic use in a range of rural and urban settings in Zimbabwe, Malawi and Uganda between 2018 and 2020. All used a ‘drug bag’ survey tool to capture the frequency and types of antibiotics used among 1811 households. We then undertook observations and interviews in residential settings, with health providers and key stakeholders to better understand the stories behind the most-used antibiotics.

          Results

          The most self-reported ‘frequently used’ antibiotics across settings were amoxicillin, cotrimoxazole and metronidazole. The stories behind their use varied between settings, reflecting differences in the configuration of health systems and antibiotic supplies. At the same time, these stories reveal cross-cutting features and omissions of contemporary global health programming that shape the contours of antibiotic (over)use at national and local levels.

          Conclusions

          Our findings challenge the predominant focus of stewardship frameworks on the practices of antibiotic end users. We suggest future interventions could consider systems—rather than individuals—as stewards of antibiotics, reducing the need to rely on these medicines to fix other issues of inequity, productivity and security.

          Related collections

          Most cited references66

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Global increase and geographic convergence in antibiotic consumption between 2000 and 2015

          Significance Antibiotic resistance, driven by antibiotic consumption, is a growing global health threat. Our report on antibiotic use in 76 countries over 16 years provides an up-to-date comprehensive assessment of global trends in antibiotic consumption. We find that the antibiotic consumption rate in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) has been converging to (and in some countries surpassing) levels typically observed in high-income countries. However, inequities in drug access persist, as many LMICs continue to be burdened with high rates of infectious disease-related mortality and low rates of antibiotic consumption. Our findings emphasize the need for global surveillance of antibiotic consumption to support policies to reduce antibiotic consumption and resistance while providing access to these lifesaving drugs.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Global antibiotic consumption 2000 to 2010: an analysis of national pharmaceutical sales data.

            Antibiotic drug consumption is a major driver of antibiotic resistance. Variations in antibiotic resistance across countries are attributable, in part, to different volumes and patterns for antibiotic consumption. We aimed to assess variations in consumption to assist monitoring of the rise of resistance and development of rational-use policies and to provide a baseline for future assessment. With use of sales data for retail and hospital pharmacies from the IMS Health MIDAS database, we reviewed trends for consumption of standard units of antibiotics between 2000 and 2010 for 71 countries. We used compound annual growth rates to assess temporal differences in consumption for each country and Fourier series and regression methods to assess seasonal differences in consumption in 63 of the countries. Between 2000 and 2010, consumption of antibiotic drugs increased by 36% (from 54 083 964 813 standard units to 73 620 748 816 standard units). Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa accounted for 76% of this increase. In most countries, antibiotic consumption varied significantly with season. There was increased consumption of carbapenems (45%) and polymixins (13%), two last-resort classes of antibiotic drugs. The rise of antibiotic consumption and the increase in use of last-resort antibiotic drugs raises serious concerns for public health. Appropriate use of antibiotics in developing countries should be encouraged. However, to prevent a striking rise in resistance in low-income and middle-income countries with large populations and to preserve antibiotic efficacy worldwide, programmes that promote rational use through coordinated efforts by the international community should be a priority. US Department of Homeland Security, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, US National Institutes of Health, Princeton Grand Challenges Program. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found
              Is Open Access

              Anthropological and socioeconomic factors contributing to global antimicrobial resistance: a univariate and multivariable analysis

              Understanding of the factors driving global antimicrobial resistance is limited. We analysed antimicrobial resistance and antibiotic consumption worldwide versus many potential contributing factors.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMJ Glob Health
                BMJ Glob Health
                bmjgh
                bmjgh
                BMJ Global Health
                BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                2059-7908
                2021
                26 November 2021
                : 6
                : 11
                : e006920
                Affiliations
                [1 ]departmentDepartment of Global Health and Development , London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine , London, UK
                [2 ]Malawi-Liverpool-Wellcome Trust Clinical Research Programme , Blantyre, Malawi
                [3 ]departmentDepartment of Clinical Sciences , Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine , Liverpool, UK
                [4 ]Infectious Diseases Research Collaboration , Kampala, Uganda
                [5 ]Biomedical Research and Training Institute , Harare, Zimbabwe
                [6 ]departmentDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology , London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine , London, UK
                [7 ]departmentDepartment of Clinical Research , London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine , London, UK
                [8 ]School of Social and Political Science, University of Edinburgh , Edinburgh, UK
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Dr Justin Dixon; Justin.Dixon@ 123456lshtm.ac.uk
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7706-7305
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7142-1158
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1895-4035
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0452-5475
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7724-9635
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1881-3774
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8830-6260
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4412-0613
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0065-6507
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0997-0850
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7660-9176
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3650-1398
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1064-5980
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2440-4355
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2630-9092
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2505-821X
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6499-7522
                Article
                bmjgh-2021-006920
                10.1136/bmjgh-2021-006920
                8628329
                34836911
                e21dd796-e65f-45e9-b2d3-c1e871c4d5eb
                © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

                This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See:  http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

                History
                : 23 July 2021
                : 12 October 2021
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100020171, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office;
                Award ID: FIEBRE Project PO7856
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000269, Economic and Social Research Council;
                Award ID: AMIS Project ES/P008100/1
                Categories
                Original Research
                1506
                Custom metadata
                unlocked

                qualitative study,public health
                qualitative study, public health

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Smart Citations
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content190

                Cited by24

                Most referenced authors574