C-reactive protein point-of-care testing and antibiotic prescribing for acute respiratory tract infections in rural primary health centres of North Ethiopia: a cross-sectional study

Cost-effectiveness of point-of-care diagnostics for AMR: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a major threat to global health. By 2050, it is forecast that AMR will cause 10 million deaths and cost 100 trillion USD annually. Point-of-care tests (POCTs) may represent a cost-effective approach to reduce AMR.

OBJECTIVES

We systematically reviewed which POCTs addressing AMR have undergone economic evaluation in primary and secondary healthcare globally, how these POCTs have been economically evaluated, and which are cost-effective in reducing antimicrobial prescribing or the burden of AMR. Clinical cost-effectiveness was additionally addressed.

METHODS

This systematic review, accordant with PRISMA guidelines, was pre-registered on PROSPERO (CRD42022315192). MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar were searched from 2000 to 2023 for relevant publications. Quality assessment was performed using the Consensus of Health Economic Criteria.

RESULTS

The search strategy identified 1421 studies, of which 20 met the inclusion criteria. The most common POCTs assessed were for respiratory infections (n = 10), STIs (n = 3), and febrile patients in low- and middle-income countries (n = 3). All studies assessed costs from a healthcare provider perspective; five additionally considered the societal cost of AMR.Eighteen studies identified POCT strategies that reduced antimicrobial prescribing. Of these, 10 identified POCTs that would be considered cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of £33.80 per antibiotic prescription avoided. Most POCT strategies improved clinical outcomes (n = 14); the remainder were clinically neutral.

CONCLUSIONS

There is evidence that some POCTs are cost-effective in reducing antimicrobial prescribing, with potential concomitant clinical benefits. Such interventions-especially CRP POCTs in both high- and low-income settings-merit further, large-scale clinical evaluation.

The Feasibility of C-Reactive Protein Point-of-Care Testing to Reduce Overuse of Antibiotics in Children with Acute Respiratory Tract Infections in Rural Kyrgyzstan: A Pilot Study

Background

In Kyrgyzstan, the morbidity prevalence of and morbidity from acute respiratory tract infections (ARTI) in children is high. Local healthcare workers (HCW) often prescribe antibiotics that are not indicative due to a mix of professional and societal factors. It is suggested to precede with a decision on antibiotics by a point-of-care test (POCT) on the appropriateness of the treatment, eg, a measurement of C-reactive protein (CRP). CRP-guided antibiotic stewardship in children with ARTI has not previously been studied in Central Asia.

Purpose

This pilot study was conducted to examine the feasibility of the methods and procedures to be used in the upcoming randomised controlled COORDINATE clinical trial (NCT05195866) and in daily clinical practice in primary care.

Patients and methods

HCWs from three selected rural healthcare facilities were trained in the CRP POCT and in interpretation of results. Children aged 6 months to 12 years attending the primary healthcare facilities with respiratory symptoms were randomly assigned to CRP-guided management or standard care, guided by clinical findings only. Children were followed up for 14 days by scheduled telephone calls to caregivers.

Results

Eighty-one children participated in this pilot study. The CRP POCT and the trial procedures were acceptable to the target group as well as to the HCWs. Children from both groups recovered equally well, with an observed significant lower use of antibiotics in the CRP group. HCWs generally adhered to the CRP guidelines, and only once was an antibiotic prescribed despite low CRP results. No safety concerns were observed. Four parents provided wrong phone numbers impeding follow-up. We will collect all mobile phone numbers in the household for the main trial.

Conclusion

The pilot provided satisfactory results, suggesting that the COORDINATE trial of CRP POCT is effective, feasible with minor adjustments and without apparent safety concerns for the participants.

Prevalence of antibiotics prescription amongst patients with and without COVID-19 in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) poses a substantial risk to public health. In low-income and middle-income (LMICs) nations, the impact of AMR is significantly more severe. The absence of data from low-income countries (LMICs) causes this topic to be frequently overlooked. Additionally, the COVID-19 pandemic could make the AMR issue even worse. Earlier guidelines recommended antibiotic use in patients with COVID-19, even in those without bacterial coinfection. This study aims to investigate the proportion of antibiotic prescriptions in LMICs among patients with and without coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), the proportion of inappropriate antibiotics, and multi-antibiotic prescribing. We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA). We retrieved data through online databases, including PubMed, Scopus, and ScienceDirect. Amongst COVID-19 patients, the meta-analytic estimate of antibiotic prescription was 0.80 (95% CI: 0.72-0.88), whereas antibiotic use among patients with non-COVID-19 infections was 0.54 (95% CI: 0.49-0.58). Half of those prescribed antibiotics (0.52, 95% CI: 0.32-0.72) are inappropriate prescriptions. In addition, we found that one-third of antibiotics prescriptions consisted of more than one antibiotic (0.32, 95% CI: 0.21-0.43). In conclusion, antibiotics are highly prescribed across LMICs, and their use is increased in patients with COVID-19. Amongst those prescriptions, inappropriate and multiple use was not uncommon. This study has several limitations, as it included two studies in an ambulatory setting, and some of the studies included in the analysis were conducted on a small scale. Nevertheless, our findings suggest that urgent action to improve prescribing practices is essential.

C-reactive protein and procalcitonin use in adults in low- and middle-income countries: a narrative review

Objectives

C-reactive protein (CRP) and procalcitonin (PCT) are widely used biomarkers in high-income countries. However, evidence for their use in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) is scant. Because many factors, including rates of endemic disease, comorbidities and genetics, may influence biomarkers' behaviour, we aimed to review available evidence generated in LMICs.

Methods

We searched the PubMed database for relevant studies within the last 20 years that originated in regions of interest (Africa, Latin America, Middle East, South Asia or South East Asia), and full-text articles involving diagnosis, prognostication and evaluation of therapeutic response with CRP and/or PCT in adults (n = 88) were reviewed and categorized in 12 predefined focus areas.

Results

Overall, results were highly heterogeneous, at times conflicting, and often lacking clinically useful cut-off values. However, most studies demonstrated higher levels of CRP/PCT in patients with bacterial versus other infections. HIV and TB patients had consistently higher levels of CRP/PCT versus controls. In addition, higher CRP/PCT levels at baseline and follow-up in HIV, TB, sepsis and respiratory tract infections were associated with poorer prognosis.

Conclusions

Evidence generated from LMIC cohorts suggests that CRP and PCT may have potential to become effective clinical guiding tools particularly in respiratory tract infections, sepsis and HIV/TB. However, more studies are needed to define potential scenarios for use and cost-effectiveness. Consensus across stakeholders regarding target conditions, laboratory standards and cut-off values would support the quality and applicability of future evidence.

Prescribing practices for presumptive TB among private general practitioners in South Africa: a cross-sectional, standardised patient study

Introduction

Medicine prescribing practices are integral to quality of care for leading infectious diseases such as tuberculosis (TB). We describe prescribing practices in South Africa’s private health sector, where an estimated third of people with TB symptoms first seek care.

Methods

Sixteen standardised patients (SPs) presented one of three cases during unannounced visits to private general practitioners (GPs) in Durban and Cape Town: TB symptoms, HIV-positive; TB symptoms, a positive molecular test for TB, HIV-negative; and TB symptoms, history of incomplete TB treatment, HIV-positive. Prescribing practices were recorded in standardised exit interviews and analysed based on their potential to contribute to negative outcomes, including increased healthcare expenditures, antibiotic overuse or misuse, and TB diagnostic delay. Factors associated with antibiotic use were assessed using Poisson regression with a robust variance estimator.

Results

Between August 2018 and July 2019, 511 SP visits were completed with 212 GPs. In 88.5% (95% CI 85.2% to 91.1%) of visits, at least one medicine (median 3) was dispensed or prescribed and most (93%) were directly dispensed. Antibiotics, which can contribute to TB diagnostic delay, were the most common medicine (76.5%, 95% CI 71.7% to 80.7% of all visits). A majority (86.1%, 95% CI 82.9% to 88.5%) belonged to the WHO Access group; fluoroquinolones made up 8.8% (95% CI 6.3% to 12.3%). Factors associated with antibiotic use included if the SP was asked to follow-up if symptoms persisted (RR 1.14, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.25) and if the SP presented as HIV-positive (RR 1.11, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.23). An injection was offered in 31.9% (95% CI 27.0% to 37.2%) of visits; 92% were unexplained. Most (61.8%, 95% CI 60.2% to 63.3%) medicines were not listed on the South African Primary Healthcare Essential Medicines List.

Conclusion

Prescribing practices among private GPs for persons presenting with TB-like symptoms in South Africa raise concern about inappropriate antimicrobial use, private healthcare costs and TB diagnostic delay.

Antibiotic prescription practices in primary care in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The widespread use of antibiotics plays a major role in the development and spread of antimicrobial resistance. However, important knowledge gaps still exist regarding the extent of their use in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), particularly at the primary care level. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies conducted in primary care in LMICs to estimate the prevalence of antibiotic prescriptions as well as the proportion of such prescriptions that are inappropriate.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

We searched PubMed, Embase, Global Health, and CENTRAL for articles published between 1 January 2010 and 4 April 2019 without language restrictions. We subsequently updated our search on PubMed only to capture publications up to 11 March 2020. Studies conducted in LMICs (defined as per the World Bank criteria) reporting data on medicine use in primary care were included. Three reviewers independently screened citations by title and abstract, whereas the full-text evaluation of all selected records was performed by 2 reviewers, who also conducted data extraction and quality assessment. A modified version of a tool developed by Hoy and colleagues was utilized to evaluate the risk of bias of each included study. Meta-analyses using random-effects models were performed to identify the proportion of patients receiving antibiotics. The WHO Access, Watch, and Reserve (AWaRe) framework was used to classify prescribed antibiotics. We identified 48 studies from 27 LMICs, mostly conducted in the public sector and in urban areas, and predominantly based on medical records abstraction and/or drug prescription audits. The pooled prevalence proportion of antibiotic prescribing was 52% (95% CI: 51%-53%), with a prediction interval of 44%-60%. Individual studies' estimates were consistent across settings. Only 9 studies assessed rationality, and the proportion of inappropriate prescription among patients with various conditions ranged from 8% to 100%. Among 16 studies in 15 countries that reported details on prescribed antibiotics, Access-group antibiotics accounted for more than 60% of the total in 12 countries. The interpretation of pooled estimates is limited by the considerable between-study heterogeneity. Also, most of the available studies suffer from methodological issues and report insufficient details to assess appropriateness of prescription.

CONCLUSIONS

Antibiotics are highly prescribed in primary care across LMICs. Although a subset of studies reported a high proportion of inappropriate use, the true extent could not be assessed due to methodological limitations. Yet, our findings highlight the need for urgent action to improve prescription practices, starting from the integration of WHO treatment recommendations and the AWaRe classification into national guidelines.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO registration number: CRD42019123269.

A systematic evaluation of immunoassay point-of-care testing to define impact on patients' outcomes

Background Point-of-care testing has been developed to provide rapid test results. Most published studies focus on analytical performance, neglecting its impact on patient outcomes. Objective To review the analytical performance and accuracy of point-of-care testing specifically planned for immunoassay and to evaluate the impact of faster results on patient management. Methods A search of electronic databases for studies reporting immunoassay results obtained in both point-of-care testing and central laboratory scenarios was performed. Data were extracted concerning the study details, and the methodological quality was assessed. The analytical characteristics and diagnostic accuracy of six points-of-care testing: troponin, procalcitonin, parathyroid hormone, brain natriuretic peptide, C-reactive protein and neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin were evaluated. Results A total of 116 scientific papers were analysed. Studies measuring procalcitonin, parathyroid hormone and neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin reported a limited impact on diagnostic decisions. Seven studies measuring C-reactive protein claimed a significant reduction of antibiotic prescription. Several authors evaluated brain natriuretic peptide or troponin reporting faster decision-making without any improvement in clinical outcome. Forty-four per cent of studies reported analytical data, showing satisfactory correlations between results obtained through point-of-care testing and central laboratory setting. Half of studies defined the diagnostic accuracy of point-of-care testing as acceptable for troponin (median sensitivity and specificity: 74% and 94%, respectively), brain natriuretic peptide (median sensitivity and specificity: 82% and 88%, respectively) and C-reactive protein (median sensitivity and specificity 85%). Conclusions Point-of-care testing immunoassay results seem to be reliable and accurate for troponin, brain natriuretic peptide and C-reactive protein. The satisfactory analytical performance, together with an excellent practicability, suggests that it could be a consistent tool in clinical practice, but data are lacking regarding the patient outcomes.

Target Product Profile for a Diagnostic Assay to Differentiate between Bacterial and Non-Bacterial Infections and Reduce Antimicrobial Overuse in Resource-Limited Settings: An Expert Consensus

Acute fever is one of the most common presenting symptoms globally. In order to reduce the empiric use of antimicrobial drugs and improve outcomes, it is essential to improve diagnostic capabilities. In the absence of microbiology facilities in low-income settings, an assay to distinguish bacterial from non-bacterial causes would be a critical first step. To ensure that patient and market needs are met, the requirements of such a test should be specified in a target product profile (TPP). To identify minimal/optimal characteristics for a bacterial vs. non-bacterial fever test, experts from academia and international organizations with expertise in infectious diseases, diagnostic test development, laboratory medicine, global health, and health economics were convened. Proposed TPPs were reviewed by this working group, and consensus characteristics were defined. The working group defined non-severely ill, non-malaria infected children as the target population for the desired assay. To provide access to the most patients, the test should be deployable to community health centers and informal health settings, and staff should require <2 days of training to perform the assay. Further, given that the aim is to reduce inappropriate antimicrobial use as well as to deliver appropriate treatment for patients with bacterial infections, the group agreed on minimal diagnostic performance requirements of >90% and >80% for sensitivity and specificity, respectively. Other key characteristics, to account for the challenging environment at which the test is targeted, included: i) time-to-result <10 min (but maximally <2 hrs); ii) storage conditions at 0–40°C, ≤90% non-condensing humidity with a minimal shelf life of 12 months; iii) operational conditions of 5–40°C, ≤90% non-condensing humidity; and iv) minimal sample collection needs (50–100μL, capillary blood). This expert approach to define assay requirements for a bacterial vs. non-bacterial assay should guide product development, and enable targeted and timely efforts by industry partners and academic institutions.