Understanding the complex knowledge economy toward antimicrobial stewardship in West Bengal, India

SSM - Health Systems Pub Date : 2025-06-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-25 DOI:10.1016/j.ssmhs.2025.100063
Ayako Ebata , Meenakshi Gautham , Anne-Sophie Jung , Mathew Hennessey , Sanghita Bhattacharyya , Gerald Bloom
{"title":"Understanding the complex knowledge economy toward antimicrobial stewardship in West Bengal, India","authors":"Ayako Ebata ,&nbsp;Meenakshi Gautham ,&nbsp;Anne-Sophie Jung ,&nbsp;Mathew Hennessey ,&nbsp;Sanghita Bhattacharyya ,&nbsp;Gerald Bloom","doi":"10.1016/j.ssmhs.2025.100063","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Knowledge dissemination and awareness raising is a common strategy for fostering antimicrobial stewardship and tackling antimicrobial resistance (AMR). However, empirical evidence suggests that the dissemination of technical/biomedical information about AMR, alone, is insufficient to improve antibiotic use in resource-poor settings. This is because antibiotic users’ decisions are based not only on biomedical knowledge but also on social and clinical information that is specific to local healthcare realities, and healthcare providers’ clinical knowledge and judgement. In this article, we propose a framework that identifies knowledge critical to deciding a course of antibiotic treatment for possible infection in resource-poor settings, and how to improve the knowledge flow to improve antibiotic use. Specifically, we focus on understanding three domains of knowledge that guide antibiotic users’ decisions: 1) scientific evidence, and evidence-based treatment guidelines; 2) local knowledge of infection patterns and risks, and the susceptibility of organisms causing infection to different antibiotics; and 3) personal and social characteristics of the patient. Drawing from the theory of information asymmetry and empirical data from West Bengal, India, we show that all three domains of knowledge demonstrated degrees of asymmetry, and community-level practitioners’ knowledge was not effectively taken into account in clinical guidance. We conclude that interventions targeting AMR need to reflect all three knowledge domains to be effective in clinical settings.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":101183,"journal":{"name":"SSM - Health Systems","volume":"4 ","pages":"Article 100063"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SSM - Health Systems","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949856225000157","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Knowledge dissemination and awareness raising is a common strategy for fostering antimicrobial stewardship and tackling antimicrobial resistance (AMR). However, empirical evidence suggests that the dissemination of technical/biomedical information about AMR, alone, is insufficient to improve antibiotic use in resource-poor settings. This is because antibiotic users’ decisions are based not only on biomedical knowledge but also on social and clinical information that is specific to local healthcare realities, and healthcare providers’ clinical knowledge and judgement. In this article, we propose a framework that identifies knowledge critical to deciding a course of antibiotic treatment for possible infection in resource-poor settings, and how to improve the knowledge flow to improve antibiotic use. Specifically, we focus on understanding three domains of knowledge that guide antibiotic users’ decisions: 1) scientific evidence, and evidence-based treatment guidelines; 2) local knowledge of infection patterns and risks, and the susceptibility of organisms causing infection to different antibiotics; and 3) personal and social characteristics of the patient. Drawing from the theory of information asymmetry and empirical data from West Bengal, India, we show that all three domains of knowledge demonstrated degrees of asymmetry, and community-level practitioners’ knowledge was not effectively taken into account in clinical guidance. We conclude that interventions targeting AMR need to reflect all three knowledge domains to be effective in clinical 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
了解复杂的知识经济对抗菌药物管理在西孟加拉邦,印度
传播知识和提高认识是促进抗菌素管理和应对抗菌素耐药性的共同战略。然而,经验证据表明,仅传播有关抗菌素耐药性的技术/生物医学信息不足以改善资源贫乏环境中的抗生素使用。这是因为抗生素使用者的决定不仅基于生物医学知识,而且还基于特定于当地卫生保健现实的社会和临床信息,以及卫生保健提供者的临床知识和判断。在本文中,我们提出了一个框架,该框架确定了在资源贫乏的环境中决定抗生素治疗过程的关键知识,以及如何改善知识流动以改善抗生素的使用。具体而言,我们专注于理解指导抗生素使用者决策的三个知识领域:1)科学证据和循证治疗指南;2)当地对感染模式和风险的了解,以及引起感染的微生物对不同抗生素的敏感性;3)患者的个人和社会特征。根据信息不对称理论和来自印度西孟加拉邦的经验数据,我们发现所有三个知识领域都表现出一定程度的不对称,并且在临床指导中没有有效地考虑到社区一级从业人员的知识。我们的结论是,针对抗菌素耐药性的干预措施需要反映所有三个知识领域才能在临床环境中有效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Challenging gender norms through participatory action research: A cross-country study of women close-to-community healthcare providers in fragile settings Co-developing Canadian hospital research tracking criteria: Findings from a National Consensus Building Meeting using the nominal group technique Assessing clinical networks through evidence: an empirical analysis of the effectiveness of cancer networks in improving patients’ quality of care and survival Breaking barriers to access to sexual and reproductive health for migrant women in Castel Volturno, Italy: Combining a public health with an anthropological perspective Early identification and referral of children with disabilities in Mainland Tanzania: A qualitative study using the system level analysis approach
×
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:604180095
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