4.8 Review

Quantifying the economic cost of antibiotic resistance and the impact of related interventions: rapid methodological review, conceptual framework and recommendations for future studies

期刊

BMC MEDICINE
卷 18, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s12916-020-1507-2

关键词

Antimicrobial resistance; Antibiotics; Economic costs; Economic evaluation

资金

  1. Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation [OPP1180644]
  2. National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Units (NIHR HPRU) in Immunisation at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine [HPRU-2012-10096]
  3. National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Units (NIHR HPRU) in Healthcare Associated Infections and Antimicrobial Resistance at the University of Oxford [HPRU-2012-10041]
  4. Imperial College London [HPRU-2012-10047]
  5. Public Health England
  6. Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation [OPP1180644] Funding Source: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Antibiotic resistance (ABR) poses a major threat to health and economic wellbeing worldwide. Reducing ABR will require government interventions to incentivise antibiotic development, prudent antibiotic use, infection control and deployment of partial substitutes such as rapid diagnostics and vaccines. The scale of such interventions needs to be calibrated to accurate and comprehensive estimates of the economic cost of ABR. Methods A conceptual framework for estimating costs attributable to ABR was developed based on previous literature highlighting methodological shortcomings in the field and additional deductive epidemiological and economic reasoning. The framework was supplemented by a rapid methodological review. Results The review identified 110 articles quantifying ABR costs. Most were based in high-income countries only (91/110), set in hospitals (95/110), used a healthcare provider or payer perspective (97/110), and used matched cohort approaches to compare costs of patients with antibiotic-resistant infections and antibiotic-susceptible infections (or no infection) (87/110). Better use of methods to correct biases and confounding when making this comparison is needed. Findings also need to be extended beyond their limitations in (1) time (projecting present costs into the future), (2) perspective (from the healthcare sector to entire societies and economies), (3) scope (from individuals to communities and ecosystems), and (4) space (from single sites to countries and the world). Analyses of the impact of interventions need to be extended to examine the impact of the intervention on ABR, rather than considering ABR as an exogeneous factor. Conclusions Quantifying the economic cost of resistance will require greater rigour and innovation in the use of existing methods to design studies that accurately collect relevant outcomes and further research into new techniques for capturing broader economic outcomes.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据