Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR)
TOOLBOX

LIST OPTIONS

FILTER BY LANGUAGE

SORT BY

RESULTS/PAGE

LIST TYPE

12 records

World Health Organization WHO  (2022)    C_WHO

download pdf Terre
Wellcome Trust; Boston Consulting Group  (2022)    CC

A view of global supply chains, pressure points, and implications for antimicrobial resistance response

download pdf Terre
World Health Organization WHO; Special Programme for TDR  (2022)    C_WHO

download pdf Terre
Pan American Health Organisation PAHO; FAO and OIE  (2022)    C_WHO

download pdf Terre
European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control ECDC  (2022)    CC

download pdf Terre
MEDBOX; Apotheker helfen  (2020)    CC

Please find all relevant guidelines and information on antimicrobial resistance AMR in our new AMR TOOLBOX www.amrbox.org

download pdf Terre
Van Katwyk, S. R.; Grimshaw, J. M.; et al  (2019)    C2

BACKGROUND: Growing political attention to antimicrobial resistance (AMR) offers a rare opportunity for achieving meaningful action. Many governments have developed national AMR action plans, but most have not yet implemented policy interventions to reduce antimicrobial overuse. A systematic evidence map can support governments in making evidence-informed decisions about implementing programs to reduce AMR, by identifying, describing, and assessing the full range of evaluated government policy options to reduce antimicrobial use in humans. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Seven databases were searched from inception to January 28, 2019, (MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, PAIS Index, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and PubMed). We identified studies that (1) clearly described a government policy intervention aimed at reducing human antimicrobial use, and (2) applied a quantitative design to measure the impact. We found 69 unique evaluations of government policy interventions carried out across 4 of the 6 WHO regions. These evaluations included randomized controlled trials (n = 4), non-randomized controlled trials (n = 3), controlled before-and-after designs (n = 7), interrupted time series designs (n = 25), uncontrolled before-and-after designs (n = 18), descriptive designs (n = 10), and cohort designs (n = 2). From these we identified 17 unique policy options for governments to reduce the human use of antimicrobials. Many studies evaluated public awareness campaigns (n = 17) and antimicrobial guidelines (n = 13); however, others offered different policy options such as professional regulation, restricted reimbursement, pay for performance, and prescription requirements. Identifying these policies can inform the development of future policies and evaluations in different contexts and health systems. Limitations of our study include the possible omission of unpublished initiatives, and that policies not evaluated with respect to antimicrobial use have not been captured in this review. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge this is the first study to provide policy makers with synthesized evidence on specific government policy interventions addressing AMR. In the future, governments should ensure that AMR policy interventions are evaluated using rigorous study designs and that study results are published

download pdf Terre
P. Collignon, J.J.Beggs, T.R. Walsh, et al.  (2018)    CC

download pdf Terre
Van Dijck C., Vlieghe E., Cox J.A. Bulletin of the World Health Organization  (2018)    C_WHO

Objective: To review the effectiveness of antibiotic stewardship interventions in hospitals in low- and middle-income countries.

download pdf Terre
Kakkar M., Chatterjee P. et. al.  (2018)    C2

download pdf Terre

12 records

12 records