METHODS: The international literature was searched for English only articles between 2000 and 2020 using specified keywords. Seven electronic databases were searched: Scopus, Cochrane, Embase, CINAHL, PubMed, Ovid Medline and Ovid Emcare. Publication screening and analysis were conducted using Joanna Briggs Institute systematic review tools.
RESULTS: Fifty-one eligible articles were identified. Inappropriate and excessive antimicrobial prescribing and use directly led to increases in antimicrobial resistance. Increasing rurality of practice is associated with disproportionally higher rates of inappropriate prescribing compared to those in metropolitan areas. Physician knowledge, attitude and behaviour play important roles in mediating antimicrobial prescribing, with strong intrinsic and extrinsic influences including patient factors. Antimicrobial stewardship strategies in rural and remote primary health care settings focus on health care provider and patient education, clinician support systems, utility of antimicrobial resistance surveillance, and policy changes. Results of these interventions were generally positive with decreased antimicrobial resistance rates and improved appropriateness of antimicrobial prescribing.
CONCLUSIONS: Inappropriate prescribing and excessive use of antimicrobials are an important contributor to the increasing resistance towards antimicrobial agents particularly in rural and remote primary health care. Antimicrobial stewardship programmes in the form of education, clinical support, surveillance, and policies have been mostly successful in reducing prescribing rates and inappropriate prescriptions. The narrative review highlighted the need for longer interventions to assess changes in antimicrobial resistance rates. The review also identified a lack of differentiation between rural and remote contexts and Indigenous health was inadequately addressed. Future research should have a greater focus on effective interventional components and patient perspectives.
METHODS: As part of the currently on-going ESSAY (Eradication Study in Stable Adults/Youths) study, we collected stool samples from 17 H. pylori-positive young adult (18-30 years-old) volunteers. The same cohort was followed up 6, 12 and 18 months-post H. pylori eradication. The impact of H. pylori on the human gut microbiome pre- and post-eradication was investigated using high throughput 16S rRNA gene (V3-V4 region) sequencing using the Illumina Miseq followed by data analysis using Qiime pipeline.
RESULTS: We compared the composition and diversity of bacterial communities in the fecal microbiome of the H. pylori-positive volunteers, before and after H. pylori eradication therapy. The 16S rRNA gene was sequenced at an average of 150,000-170,000 reads/sample. The microbial diversity were similar pre- and post-H. pylori eradication with no significant differences in richness and evenness of bacterial species. Despite that the general profile of the gut microbiome was similar pre- and post-eradication, some changes in the bacterial communities at the phylum and genus levels were notable, particularly the decrease in relative abundance of Bacterioidetes and corresponding increase in Firmicutes after H. pylori eradication. The significant increase of short-chain fatty acids (SCFA)-producing bacteria genera could also be associated with increased risk of metabolic disorders.
CONCLUSIONS: Our preliminary stool metagenomics study shows that eradication of H. pylori caused perturbation of the gut microbiome and may indirectly affect the health of human. Clinicians should be aware of the effect of broad spectrum antibiotics used in H. pylori eradication regimen and be cautious in the clinical management of H. pylori infection, particularly in immunocompromised patients.
METHODS: Two independent reviewers (KY and SJ) screened two electronic databases, PubMed and Scopus, for randomized clinical trials on the use of systemic doxycycline as an adjunct to scaling and root planing in improving periodontal status and glycemic control in diabetic patients with periodontitis using predetermined selection criteria within a 3-month period. The reviewers independently did data screening, data selection, data extraction and risk of bias. Quality of studies involved was analysed using the revised Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0. Weighted standard mean differences (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals were calculated using a random effects meta-analysis model. Publication bias was evaluated using funnel plot. Quality of evidence was evaluated by Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.
RESULTS: Electronic searches provided 1358 records and six studies were selected. The meta-analyses indicated that there was no statistically significant difference in the improvement of periodontal status with the use of systemic doxycycline as an adjunct for scaling and root planing (SRP). SMD of clinical attachment levels (- 0.22 [- 0.52, 0.08]) and HbA1c levels (- 0.13 [- 0.41, 0.15]) were calculated. Overall risk of bias is high in 2 out of 6 studies involved.
CONCLUSION: Systemic doxycycline when used in addition to scaling and root planing yields no significant improvement of clinical attachment levels for periodontal status and reduction of HbA1c levels in treatment of diabetic patients with periodontitis when comparing the test group to the control group.
METHODS: This study will use a multicentre, open-label non-inferiority trial design comparing cefiderocol and standard of care antibiotics. Eligible participants will be adult inpatients who are diagnosed with a bloodstream infection with a Gram-negative organism on the basis of a positive blood culture result where the acquisition meets the definition for healthcare-associated or hospital-acquired. It will compare cefiderocol with the current standard of care (SOC) antibiotic regimen according to the patient's treating clinician. Eligible participants will be randomised 1:1 to cefiderocol or SOC and receive 5-14 days of antibiotic therapy. Trial recruitment will occur in at least 20 sites in ten countries (Australia, Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand, Turkey and Greece). The sample size has been derived from an estimated 14 day, all-cause mortality rate of 10% in the control group, and a non-inferiority margin of 10% difference in the two groups. A minimum of 284 patients are required in total to achieve 80% power with a two-sided alpha level of 0.05. Data describing demographic information, risk factors, concomitant antibiotics, illness scores, microbiology, multidrug-resistant organism screening, discharge and mortality will be collected.
DISCUSSION: With increasing antimicrobial resistance, there is a need for the development of new antibiotics with broad activity against Gram-negative pathogens such as cefiderocol. By selecting a population at risk for multi-drug-resistant pathogens and commencing study treatment early in the clinical illness (within 48 h of index blood culture) the trial hopes to provide guidance to clinicians of the efficacy of this novel agent.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: The GAME CHANGER trial is registered under the US National Institute of Health ClinicalTrials.gov register, reference number NCT03869437 . Registered on March 11, 2019.