dc.contributor.author
Tacconelli, Evelina
dc.contributor.author
Cataldo, Maria A.
dc.contributor.author
Paul, M.
dc.contributor.author
Leibovici, L.
dc.contributor.author
Kluytmans, Jan
dc.contributor.author
Schroeder, Wiebke
dc.contributor.author
Foschi, Federico
dc.contributor.author
De Angelis, Giulia
dc.contributor.author
De Waure, Chiara
dc.contributor.author
Cadeddu, Chiara
dc.contributor.author
Mutters, Nico T.
dc.contributor.author
Gastmeier, Petra
dc.contributor.author
Cookson, Barry
dc.date.accessioned
2018-06-08T03:24:43Z
dc.date.available
2016-10-07T11:19:19.396Z
dc.identifier.uri
https://refubium.fu-berlin.de/handle/fub188/15113
dc.identifier.uri
http://dx.doi.org/10.17169/refubium-19301
dc.description.abstract
Objectives To explore the accuracy of application of the Strengthening the
Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) tool in
epidemiological studies focused on the evaluation of the role of antibiotics
in selecting resistance, and to derive and test an extension of STROBE to
improve the suitability of the tool in evaluating the quality of reporting in
these area. Methods A three-step study was performed. First, a systematic
review of the literature analysing the association between antimicrobial
exposure and acquisition of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and/or
multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii was performed. Second, articles
were reviewed according to the STROBE checklist for epidemiological studies.
Third, a set of potential new items focused on antimicrobial-resistance
quality indicators was derived through an expert two-round RAND-modified
Delphi procedure and tested on the articles selected through the literature
review. Results The literature search identified 78 studies. Overall, the
quality of reporting appeared to be poor in most areas. Five STROBE items,
comprising statistical analysis and study objectives, were satisfactory in
<25% of the studies. Informative abstract, reporting of bias, control of
confounding, generalisability and description of study size were missing in
more than half the articles. A set of 21 new items was developed and tested.
The new items focused particularly on the study setting, antimicrobial usage
indicators, and patients epidemiological and clinical characteristics. The
performance of the new items in included studies was very low (<25%).
Conclusions Our paper reveals that reporting in epidemiological papers
analysing the association between antimicrobial usage and development of
resistance is poor. The implementation of the newly developed STROBE for
antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) tool should enhance appropriate study design
and reporting, and therefore contribute to the improvement of evidence to be
used for AMS programme development and assessment.
en
dc.rights.uri
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
dc.subject.ddc
600 Technik, Medizin, angewandte Wissenschaften::610 Medizin und Gesundheit
dc.type
Wissenschaftlicher Artikel
dcterms.bibliographicCitation
BMJ Open. - 6 (2016), 2, Artikel Nr. e010134
dc.title.subtitle
recommendations to optimise reporting of epidemiological studies on
antimicrobial resistance and informing improvement in antimicrobial
stewardship
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.doi
10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010134
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.url
http://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/6/2/e010134
refubium.affiliation
Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin
de
refubium.mycore.fudocsId
FUDOCS_document_000000025514
refubium.note.author
Der Artikel wurde in einer Open-Access-Zeitschrift publiziert.
refubium.resourceType.isindependentpub
no
refubium.mycore.derivateId
FUDOCS_derivate_000000007193
dcterms.accessRights.openaire
open access