Surgical prophylaxis in Haydom Lutheran Hospital, Tanzania – learning from a point prevalence survey

IF 1.8 Q3 INFECTIOUS DISEASES Infection Prevention in Practice Pub Date : 2025-01-09 DOI:10.1016/j.infpip.2024.100429
T.J. Schrama , K.J. Vliegenthart-Jongbloed , M. Gemuwang , E.Q. Nuwass
{"title":"Surgical prophylaxis in Haydom Lutheran Hospital, Tanzania – learning from a point prevalence survey","authors":"T.J. Schrama ,&nbsp;K.J. Vliegenthart-Jongbloed ,&nbsp;M. Gemuwang ,&nbsp;E.Q. Nuwass","doi":"10.1016/j.infpip.2024.100429","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a significant global health concern, with improper antibiotic use contributing to its rise. Tanzania initiated an AMR action plan in 2017, but comprehensive surveillance and stewardship efforts remain limited. This study focused on evaluating antibiotic use, particularly surgical prophylaxis, in a rural Tanzanian hospital.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>The study was conducted at Haydom Lutheran Hospital in Tanzania in May 2023, using a cross-sectional point prevalence survey. Antibiotic use in all patients admitted for &gt;24 h and those undergoing surgery was recorded, including type, dose, indication and duration. Quality indicators for surgical prophylaxis were assessed.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Among 199 inpatients, 55% received antibiotics, with surgical prophylaxis accounting for 23% of prescriptions. Notably, none of the patients who received surgical prophylaxis received a single-dose regimen, and 67% exceeded the recommended 24-h duration. A combination of ampicillin-cloxacillin plus metronidazole was the most commonly prescribed combination for surgical prophylaxis (41% of prescriptions). Thirty-three percent of the antibiotics prescribed for surgical prophylaxis were classified as ‘Not recommended’ by the World Health Organization. Furthermore, 90% of surgical prophylaxis prescriptions lacked documented rationale, and 83% of prescriptions lacked stop/review dates in medical records.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>This study reveals a high prevalence of prolonged antibiotic use for surgical prophylaxis, frequent use of antibiotics classified as ‘Not recommended’, and a lack of adequate documentation, which deviates from international standards. These practices highlight the urgent need for contextualized national guidelines, large-scale implementation projects of evidence-based interventions, and local initiatives in antibiotic stewardship, particularly in low-resource settings.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":33492,"journal":{"name":"Infection Prevention in Practice","volume":"7 1","pages":"Article 100429"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Infection Prevention in Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590088924000933","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a significant global health concern, with improper antibiotic use contributing to its rise. Tanzania initiated an AMR action plan in 2017, but comprehensive surveillance and stewardship efforts remain limited. This study focused on evaluating antibiotic use, particularly surgical prophylaxis, in a rural Tanzanian hospital.

Methods

The study was conducted at Haydom Lutheran Hospital in Tanzania in May 2023, using a cross-sectional point prevalence survey. Antibiotic use in all patients admitted for >24 h and those undergoing surgery was recorded, including type, dose, indication and duration. Quality indicators for surgical prophylaxis were assessed.

Results

Among 199 inpatients, 55% received antibiotics, with surgical prophylaxis accounting for 23% of prescriptions. Notably, none of the patients who received surgical prophylaxis received a single-dose regimen, and 67% exceeded the recommended 24-h duration. A combination of ampicillin-cloxacillin plus metronidazole was the most commonly prescribed combination for surgical prophylaxis (41% of prescriptions). Thirty-three percent of the antibiotics prescribed for surgical prophylaxis were classified as ‘Not recommended’ by the World Health Organization. Furthermore, 90% of surgical prophylaxis prescriptions lacked documented rationale, and 83% of prescriptions lacked stop/review dates in medical records.

Conclusion

This study reveals a high prevalence of prolonged antibiotic use for surgical prophylaxis, frequent use of antibiotics classified as ‘Not recommended’, and a lack of adequate documentation, which deviates from international standards. These practices highlight the urgent need for contextualized national guidelines, large-scale implementation projects of evidence-based interventions, and local initiatives in antibiotic stewardship, particularly in low-resource settings.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Infection Prevention in Practice
Infection Prevention in Practice Medicine-Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
58
审稿时长
61 days
期刊最新文献
Effects of disposable pull-through brush types for reprocessing of flexible endoscopes in clinical environment Sodium dichloroisocyanurate: a promising candidate for the disinfection of resilient drain biofilm Clinical and economic impact of ventilator-associated pneumonia in intensive care units in Japan Healthcare professionals' knowledge, attitudes, and practices in preventing catheter-associated urinary tract infections: a cross-sectional study in a rehabilitation facility Surgical prophylaxis in Haydom Lutheran Hospital, Tanzania – learning from a point prevalence survey
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1