Cargando…

Identification of outcomes reported for hospital antimicrobial stewardship interventions using a systematic review of reviews

BACKGROUND: Randomized trials of hospital antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) interventions aimed to optimize antimicrobial use contribute less to the evidence base due to heterogeneity in outcome selection and reporting. Developing a core outcome set (COS) for these interventions can be a way to addres...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yousuf, Shazia, Rzewuska, Magdalena, Duncan, Eilidh, Ramsay, Craig
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9806591/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36601549
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jacamr/dlac127
_version_ 1784862562573090816
author Yousuf, Shazia
Rzewuska, Magdalena
Duncan, Eilidh
Ramsay, Craig
author_facet Yousuf, Shazia
Rzewuska, Magdalena
Duncan, Eilidh
Ramsay, Craig
author_sort Yousuf, Shazia
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Randomized trials of hospital antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) interventions aimed to optimize antimicrobial use contribute less to the evidence base due to heterogeneity in outcome selection and reporting. Developing a core outcome set (COS) for these interventions can be a way to address this problem. The first step in developing a COS is to identify and map all outcomes. OBJECTIVES: To identify outcomes reported in systematic reviews of hospital AMS interventions. METHODS: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, MEDLINE and Embase were searched for systematic reviews published up until August 2019 of interventions relevant to reducing unnecessary antimicrobial use for inpatient populations in secondary care hospitals. The methodological quality of included reviews was assessed using AMSTAR-2, A (revised) MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews. Extracted outcomes were analysed using deductive and inductive thematic analysis. A list of overarching (unique) outcomes reflects the outcomes identified within the systematic reviews. RESULTS: Forty-one systematic reviews were included. Thirty-three (81%) systematic reviews were of critically low or low quality. A long list of 1739 verbatim outcomes was identified and categorized under five core areas of COMET (Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials) taxonomy: ‘resources use’ (45%), ‘physiological/clinical’ (27%), ‘life impact’ (16%), ‘death’ (8%) and ‘adverse events’ (4%). A total of 421 conceptually different outcomes were identified and grouped into 196 overarching outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: There is significant heterogeneity in outcomes reported for hospital AMS interventions. Reported outcomes do not cover all domains of the COMET framework and may miss outcomes relevant to patients (e.g. emotional, social functioning, etc.). The included systematic reviews lacked methodological rigour, which warrants further improvements.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9806591
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-98065912023-01-03 Identification of outcomes reported for hospital antimicrobial stewardship interventions using a systematic review of reviews Yousuf, Shazia Rzewuska, Magdalena Duncan, Eilidh Ramsay, Craig JAC Antimicrob Resist Systematic Review BACKGROUND: Randomized trials of hospital antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) interventions aimed to optimize antimicrobial use contribute less to the evidence base due to heterogeneity in outcome selection and reporting. Developing a core outcome set (COS) for these interventions can be a way to address this problem. The first step in developing a COS is to identify and map all outcomes. OBJECTIVES: To identify outcomes reported in systematic reviews of hospital AMS interventions. METHODS: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, MEDLINE and Embase were searched for systematic reviews published up until August 2019 of interventions relevant to reducing unnecessary antimicrobial use for inpatient populations in secondary care hospitals. The methodological quality of included reviews was assessed using AMSTAR-2, A (revised) MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews. Extracted outcomes were analysed using deductive and inductive thematic analysis. A list of overarching (unique) outcomes reflects the outcomes identified within the systematic reviews. RESULTS: Forty-one systematic reviews were included. Thirty-three (81%) systematic reviews were of critically low or low quality. A long list of 1739 verbatim outcomes was identified and categorized under five core areas of COMET (Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials) taxonomy: ‘resources use’ (45%), ‘physiological/clinical’ (27%), ‘life impact’ (16%), ‘death’ (8%) and ‘adverse events’ (4%). A total of 421 conceptually different outcomes were identified and grouped into 196 overarching outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: There is significant heterogeneity in outcomes reported for hospital AMS interventions. Reported outcomes do not cover all domains of the COMET framework and may miss outcomes relevant to patients (e.g. emotional, social functioning, etc.). The included systematic reviews lacked methodological rigour, which warrants further improvements. Oxford University Press 2023-01-02 /pmc/articles/PMC9806591/ /pubmed/36601549 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jacamr/dlac127 Text en © The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
spellingShingle Systematic Review
Yousuf, Shazia
Rzewuska, Magdalena
Duncan, Eilidh
Ramsay, Craig
Identification of outcomes reported for hospital antimicrobial stewardship interventions using a systematic review of reviews
title Identification of outcomes reported for hospital antimicrobial stewardship interventions using a systematic review of reviews
title_full Identification of outcomes reported for hospital antimicrobial stewardship interventions using a systematic review of reviews
title_fullStr Identification of outcomes reported for hospital antimicrobial stewardship interventions using a systematic review of reviews
title_full_unstemmed Identification of outcomes reported for hospital antimicrobial stewardship interventions using a systematic review of reviews
title_short Identification of outcomes reported for hospital antimicrobial stewardship interventions using a systematic review of reviews
title_sort identification of outcomes reported for hospital antimicrobial stewardship interventions using a systematic review of reviews
topic Systematic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9806591/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36601549
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jacamr/dlac127
work_keys_str_mv AT yousufshazia identificationofoutcomesreportedforhospitalantimicrobialstewardshipinterventionsusingasystematicreviewofreviews
AT rzewuskamagdalena identificationofoutcomesreportedforhospitalantimicrobialstewardshipinterventionsusingasystematicreviewofreviews
AT duncaneilidh identificationofoutcomesreportedforhospitalantimicrobialstewardshipinterventionsusingasystematicreviewofreviews
AT ramsaycraig identificationofoutcomesreportedforhospitalantimicrobialstewardshipinterventionsusingasystematicreviewofreviews