AIM: This study aims to compare medical and pharmacy students' perceived preparedness, learning practices and usefulness of the education and training on antibiotic use and resistance imparted during undergraduate studies in Pakistan.
DESIGN AND SETTING: It was amulti-centre cross-sectional survey of medical and pharmacy colleges in Punjab, Pakistan.
METHOD: A self-administered questionnaire was used to collect data from final year medical and pharmacy students. Descriptive statistics were used for categorical variables while independent t-test and One-way ANOVA computed group differences.
RESULT: Nine hundred forty-eight respondents (526 medical and 422 pharmacy students) completed the survey from 26 medical and 19 pharmacy colleges. Majority (76.1%) of the pharmacy students had not completed a clinical rotation in infectious diseases. The top three most often used sources of learning antibiotic use and resistance were the same among the medical and the pharmacy students; included textbooks, Wikipedia, and smart phone apps. Overall self-perceived preparedness scores showed no significant difference between pharmacy and medical students. The least prepared areas by medical and pharmacy students included transition from intravenous to oral antibiotics and interpretation of antibiograms. Both medical and pharmacy students found problem solving sessions attended by a small group of students to be the most useful (very useful) teaching methodology to learn antibiotic use and resistance.
CONCLUSIONS: Differences exist between medical and pharmacy students in educational resources used, topics covered during undergraduate degree. To curb the growing antibiotic misuse and resistance, the concerned authorities should undertake targeted educational reforms to ensure that future physicians and pharmacists can play a pivotal role in rationalizing the use of antibiotics.
METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study on patients in medical ward Hospital Kuala Lumpur, admitted between January 2016 and June 2019. A Kaplan-Meier survival curve and Fleming-Harrington test were used to compare the overall survival rates between early, late, and those not de-escalated on antibiotics while multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression was used to determine prognostic factors associated with mortality and the impact of de-escalation on 30-day all-cause mortality.
RESULTS: Overall mortality rates were not significantly different when patients were not de-escalated on extended or restricted antibiotics, compared to those de-escalated early or later (p = 0.760). Variables associated with 30-day all-cause mortality were a Sequential Organ Function Assessment (SOFA) score on the day of antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) intervention and Charlson's comorbidity score (CCS). After controlling for confounders, early and late antibiotics were not associated with an increased risk of mortality.
CONCLUSION: The results of this study reinforce that restricted or extended antibiotic de-escalation in patients does not significantly affect 30-day all-cause mortality compared to continuation with extended and restricted antibiotics.