Nomen est omen: why we need to rename 'antimicrobial resistance'

Differing terminology used to describe antimicrobial resistance can influence comprehension and subsequent behavioural intent

BACKGROUND

Despite global campaigns, the public's understanding of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) as a global emergency remains limited. Behaviour change is crucial in preserving antimicrobials but requires improved understanding of AMR at a population level.

METHODS

Members of the public co-designed intervention arms, selecting three alternatives to AMR to be evaluated in a four-armed online randomised behavioural experiment. The primary outcome was attitudes towards AMR. Secondary and exploratory outcomes included comprehension, behavioural intent and recall.

RESULTS

In April 2024, 4296 participants completed the online survey. Antibiotic Resistance is the most effective terminology for attitudes towards AMR (p < 3.95E-06), comprehension (p = 0.013) and recall (p < 0.0003). Both Antibiotic Resistance and The Antibiotic Crisis reduce behavioural intent to stop a course of antibiotics early.

CONCLUSIONS

Alternative terminology to describe AMR can impact attitudes, comprehension and behavioural intent towards antimicrobial use. Co-designing such terminology with the public can be an effective way utilising meaningful language in public health campaigns.

The language of antimicrobial and antibiotic resistance is blocking global collective action

Sustainable access to effective antibiotics is a foundational need for functioning health care that is increasingly threatened by antibiotic resistance. Although resistance has been known as long as antibiotics have been in clinical use, there are still multiple gaps in the global and local responses. One often cited cause for this complacency is the language that is used to describe the problem and its consequences. In this paper, we survey some examples of the current discussions around antibiotic resistance and seek to offer a path towards unified and understandable messaging that is relevant both to the public and policymakers by using narratives that highlight the individual and societal consequences of antibiotic resistance. Major shortcomings in the current language that hamper both the understanding of antibiotic resistance and needed behaviour change have been identified in scientific papers and special reports. These shortcomings range from terminology that is difficult to understand, through a lack of personal relevance, to a fragmented response in the policy field. We propose that scientists, including behaviour change experts, and other key stakeholders that are engaged in the issue take lead to agreement on the core scientific facts and to formulate a vision that can be a foundation for creation of consistent global narratives. These narratives must in turn be adapted to local contexts. Development of such narratives should be viewed as an essential component in national action plans on AMR to raise awareness, empower citizens and incentivise societal behaviour change, policy development and implementation of governance structures.

Understanding the lived-experience and support-needs of people living with antimicrobial resistance in the UK through interpretative phenomenological analysis

In the UK nearly 54,000 infections were caused by serious resistant bacteria in 2022 but there is a lack of evidence regarding the long-term impact on patients' lives nor what support they need. This research aimed to answer the question: "What are the key elements of experience and support needs of people living with AMR in the UK?". In-depth semi-structured interviews were undertaken with nine people who had been living with resistant infections or colonisation for 12-months or longer. Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis was used to study the accounts and illustrate individuals' experiences and support-needs. Participants experienced marginalisation and isolation but also empowerment; described across three major themes: (1) I live in fear and stigma: The long-term impact of AMR; (2) I am battling on my own: A journey toward self-advocacy; and (3) I like to share my story: The role of AMR communities. All participants perceived a lack of knowledge, information, and support from clinicians; difficulties accessing reliable and understandable information; and lack of understanding from family and friends. Charities and online groups provided support with coping with their situation and improving mental health and wellbeing. Understandable and relatable information regarding the science of AMR, transmission, prevention, and living with AMR needs to be provided by clinicians and healthcare services around the time of diagnosis to readily available after diagnosis.

Should we stop referring to the pandemic of antimicrobial resistance as silent?

Background

Referring to the ongoing antimicrobial resistance crisis as a 'silent' pandemic has gained popularity, but there are mixed views on whether such a phrase should be used in public health communication. Some researchers have argued that using the term 'silent pandemic' may lower the perceived threat and hinder mobilization efforts to tackle the problem.

Objectives

I investigated the impact of the phrase 'silent pandemic' on perceived threat levels and mobilization intentions.

Methods

In three experiments (n = 1677), participants from the UK's general adult population were randomly allocated to either a 'pandemic' or 'silent pandemic' condition, where the different terms were embedded in statements (Experiment 1) or brief information materials (Experiments 2 and 3). The term 'silent pandemic' was also presented with a brief description of its intended meaning (Experiment 3). The participants expressed their perception of the threat and their mobilization intentions.

Results

In Experiments 1 and 2, referring to the pandemic as silent did not significantly affect the perceived threat (Cohen's d = -0.06; Cohen's d = 0.08, respectively) or mobilization intentions (Cohen's d = -0.07; Cohen's d = 0.11, respectively). However, in Experiment 3, the term 'silent pandemic' decreased the perceived threat and mobilization intentions (Cohen's d = 0.27; Cohen's d = 0.35, respectively).

Conclusions

Describing the pandemic as 'silent' yielded no measurable effects on perceived threat and mobilization intentions but it showed depreciating effects when accompanied by its intended meaning. Taken together, it is advisable to avoid the term.

Existing terminology related to antimicrobial resistance fails to evoke risk perceptions and be remembered

BACKGROUND

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a global healthcare threat promoted by all use of antibiotics. Hence, reducing overuse of antibiotics is essential. The necessary behaviour change relies on effective public health communication, but previous information campaigns-while showing some successes-have fallen short in generating a lasting increase of public awareness. A potential reason for this is AMR-related terminology, which has been criticised as inconsistent, abstract and difficult to pronounce. We report the first empirical test of word memorability and risk association for the most frequent AMR-related health terms.

METHODS

Across two surveys sampling 237 US and 924 UK participants, we test people's memory for and the risk they associate with six AMR-related terms and thirty-four additional health risk terms (e.g., cancer). Participants also rate the terms on different linguistic dimensions including concreteness, familiarity, processing fluency and pronounceability.

RESULTS

Our findings suggest that existing AMR-related health terms-particularly "AMR" and "Antimicrobial resistance"-are unsuitable for public health communication, because they score consistently low on both memorability and risk association. Out of the AMR terms, "Antibiotic resistance" and-to a lesser extent-"Drug-resistant infections" perform best. Regression analyses suggest that linguistic attributes (e.g., familiarity, processing fluency, pronounceability) are predictors of the terms' risk association.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings highlight an urgent need to rename AMR with a memorable term that effectively signals the existential threat of AMR and thereby motivates a change in antibiotic use. The success of the revised term is likely to depend, at least partially, on its linguistic attributes.

Evidencing general acceptability of open-label placebo use for tackling overtreatment in primary care: a mixed methods study

BACKGROUND

Overtreatment poses a challenge to healthcare systems due to harmful consequences of avoidable side-effects and costs. This study presents the first account for examining the feasibility of placebo use for reducing overtreatment in primary care, including whether public attitudes support the use of different placebo types in place of inappropriate prescriptions of antibiotics, antidepressants, or analgesics.

METHODS

We used a multi-study, mixed-methods design, including patient and public (PPI) consultations, focus groups (Study 1) and two pre-registered online experiments (Studies 2 and 3).

RESULTS

Study 1 (N = 16) explored everyday conceptions and practicalities of potential placebo use in the context of respiratory infections. Findings highlighted the importance of trusting doctor-patient relationships and safety-netting. Study 2 employed a randomised experiment with a representative UK sample (N = 980), investigating attitudes towards 5 different treatment options for respiratory infections: (1) blinded + pure placebo, (2) open-label + pure placebo, (3) open-label + impure placebo, (4) antibiotic treatment, and (5) no treatment. Study 2 also examined how attitudes varied based on wording and individual differences. Findings indicated general support (ηp2 = .149, large effect size) for replacing inappropriate antibiotics with open-label + impure placebos, although personal placebo acceptability was lower. Also, older people, individuals suffering from chronic illness or those showing higher levels of health anxiety appeared less amenable to placebo use. Study 3 (N = 1177) compared attitudes towards treatment options across three clinical scenarios: respiratory infection, depression and pain. Findings suggested significant differences in the acceptability of placebo options based on the clinical context. In the infection scenario, options for open-label + pure placebos, open-label + impure placebos and no treatment were rated significantly more acceptable (ηp2 = .116, medium effect size) compared to the depression and pain scenarios. Again, general support for placebos was higher than placebo acceptability for personal use.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings from PPI and three studies indicate general support for combatting overprescribing in primary care through clinical placebo use. This is an indicator for wider UK public support for a novel, behavioural strategy to target a long-standing healthcare challenge. General acceptability appears to be highest for the use of open-label + impure placebos in the context of antibiotic overprescribing.

Community pharmacists as antimicrobial guardians and gatekeepers - A qualitative study of the perspectives of pharmacy sector stakeholders

Background

Community pharmacists, as primary care providers, are an underutilised resource in antimicrobial stewardship (AMS). Primary care plays an important role in tackling antimicrobial resistance (AMR) as the principle of balancing access to antimicrobials while ensuring optimal use is agnostic to health setting. Understanding the sector's perceptions and practices towards AMS involvement is a continuing focus area of research. However, there is an opportunity to understand the sociological factors which influence the profession's contribution to stewardship practice, particularly across a broader spectrum of sector stakeholders at the individual, practice, system, and policy levels.

Objective

To explore stakeholders' perceptions of the Australian community pharmacy sector's AMS involvement.

Methods

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with fifteen key informants from the Australian community pharmacy sector. Participants' insights were invited across three broad areas: (1) understanding of AMR and AMS; and the (2) current and (3) future state of community pharmacy's AMS involvement. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analyzed using a combined method of inductive (informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework) and deductive thematic analysis.

Results

Perceptions on promoting community pharmacists' AMS involvement within their existing role in promoting the quality use of medicines were heard. Adopting an antimicrobial guardian or gatekeeper role was perceived as influenced by the timing of their interaction with a patient either prior to, or post-consultation with a general practitioner (GP). Suggestions that the profession's potential and actual role in AMS could be challenged or even delimited due to lack of access to completeness of clinical information, and perceived consequences from a clinical and professional engagement perspective were also heard.

Conclusion

Collaborative partnerships between GPs and community pharmacists, framing stewardship within a quality use of medicines agenda, and highlighting connections between pharmacists' professional services such as minor ailments are key elements enabling community pharmacist's antimicrobial gatekeeper and guardian role.

Tackling AMR from a multidisciplinary perspective: a primer from education and psychology

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is currently one of the most concerning threats in public health. The efforts to tackle the problem require a global One Health approach, using multidisciplinary approaches and a thorough understanding of the topic both by the general public and the experts. Currently, the lack of a shared mental model of the problem, the absence of a sense of responsibility amongst the different actors and a deficient education on the topic burden the efforts to slow down the emergency and spread of antimicrobial resistant infections. We here propose a multidisciplinary approach to tackle the AMR problem, taking into consideration not only the input from the biological and medical sciences but also the input from the social sciences. Specifically, we suggest strategies from education and psychology to increase awareness about antimicrobial resistance and to implement more effective interventions. Finally, we advocate for a comprehensive and a solidaristic model as the only solution for a problem which knows no borders. As such, political will and international cooperation will be key to achieve the desired change in antibiotic resistance trend.

Achieving Antimicrobial Stewardship on the Global Scale: Challenges and Opportunities

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) has been clearly identified as a major global health challenge. It is a leading cause of human deaths and also has a toll on animals, plants, and the environment. Despite the considerable socio-economic impacts, the level of awareness of the problem remains woefully inadequate, and antimicrobials are not generally recognized as a global common good, one that everyone has a role and responsibility to conserve. It is imperative for antimicrobial stewardship to be more widely implemented to achieve better control of the AMR phenomenon. The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations plays an important role in promoting and facilitating antimicrobial stewardship. The specific needs to be addressed and barriers to be overcome, in particular, in low- and middle-income countries in order to implement antimicrobial stewardship practices in agrifood systems are being identified. As a global community, it is essential that we now move beyond discussing the AMR problem and focus on implementing solutions. Thus, FAO provides multi-pronged support for nations to improve antimicrobial stewardship through programs to strengthen governance, increase awareness, develop and enhance AMR surveillance, and implement best practices related to antimicrobial resistance in agrifood systems. For example, FAO is developing a platform to collect data on AMR in animals and antimicrobial use (AMU) in plants (InFARM), working on a campaign to reduce the need to use antimicrobials, studying the use of alternatives to the use of antimicrobials (especially those used for growth promotion) and actively promoting the implementation of the Codex Alimentarius AMR standards. Together, these will contribute to the control of AMR and also bring us closer to the achievement of multiple sustainable development goals.

Resetting the agenda for antibiotic resistance through a health systems perspective

Although the individual and societal consequences of antibiotic resistance spiral upwards, coordinated action has not kept pace on a global scale. The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the need for resilient health systems and has resulted in an unprecedented rate of collaboration in scientific, medical, social, and political dimensions. The pandemic has also created a renewed awareness of the importance of infectious diseases and is a substantial entry point for reigniting the momentum towards containing the silent pandemic of antibiotic resistance. In this Viewpoint, we discuss the limitations in the current narrative on antibiotic resistance and how it could be improved, including concerted efforts to close essential data gaps. We discuss the need for capacity building and coordination at the national and global levels to strengthen the understanding of the importance of sustainable access to effective antibiotics for all health systems that could generate tangible links to current processes for global health and development.

Finding What Is Inaccessible: Antimicrobial Resistance Language Use among the One Health Domains

The success of a One Health approach to combating antimicrobial resistance (AMR) requires effective data sharing across the three One Health domains (human, animal, and environment). To investigate if there are differences in language use across the One Health domains, we examined the peer-reviewed literature using a combination of text data mining and natural language processing techniques on 20,000 open-access articles related to AMR and One Health. Evaluating AMR key term frequency from the European PubMed Collection published between 1990 and 2019 showed distinct AMR language usage within each domain and incongruent language usage across domains, with significant differences in key term usage frequencies when articles were grouped by the One Health sub-specialties (2-way ANOVA; p < 0.001). Over the 29-year period, "antibiotic resistance" and "AR" were used 18 times more than "antimicrobial resistance" and "AMR". The discord of language use across One Health potentially weakens the effectiveness of interdisciplinary research by creating accessibility issues for researchers using search engines. This research was the first to quantify this disparate language use within One Health, which inhibits collaboration and crosstalk between domains. We suggest the following for authors publishing AMR-related research within the One Health context: (1) increase title/abstract searchability by including both antimicrobial and antibiotic resistance related search terms; (2) include "One Health" in the title/abstract; and (3) prioritize open-access publication.