TY - JOUR
T1 - Laboratory-based surveillance of antimicrobial resistance in regions of Kenya
T2 - An assessment of capacities, practices, and barriers by means of multi-facility survey
AU - Moirongo, Rehema Moraa
AU - Aglanu, Leslie Mawuli
AU - Lamshöft, Maike
AU - Adero, Brian Omondi
AU - Yator, Solomon
AU - Anyona, Stephen
AU - May, Jürgen
AU - Lorenz, Eva
AU - Eibach, Daniel
N1 - Funding Information:
This study was made possible through a grant from the German Federal Ministry of Health (BMG) through the Global Health Protection Program (GHPP) (Grant No. ZMV15 2519 GHP 705).
Funding Information:
Our profound gratitude goes to all laboratory personnel participating in the survey. We also specially thank Mr. Evanson Lein of Kenyatta University and Mr. Alex Ireri of Kenya Airways Medical Center for their support in organization of participants. Furthermore, we express gratitude to Wibke Loag for her invaluable support in data management.
Publisher Copyright:
Copyright © 2022 Moirongo, Aglanu, Lamshöft, Adero, Yator, Anyona, May, Lorenz and Eibach.
PY - 2022/11/28
Y1 - 2022/11/28
N2 - Background: Adequate laboratory capacity is critical in the implementation of coherent surveillance for antimicrobial resistance (AMR). We describe capacities and deficiencies in laboratory infrastructure and AMR surveillance practices among health facilities in Kenya to support progress toward broader sustainable laboratory-based AMR surveillance. Methods: A convenience sample of health facilities from both public and private sectors across the country were selected. Information was obtained cross-sectionally between 5th October and 8th December 2020 through online surveys of laboratory managers. The assessment covered quality assurance, management and dissemination of AMR data, material and equipment, staffing, microbiology competency, biosafety and certification. A scoring scheme was developed for the evaluation and interpreted as (80% and above) facility is adequate (60–79%) requires some strengthening and (<60%) needing significant strengthening. Average scores were compared across facilities in public and private sectors, rural and urban settings, as well as national, county, and community levels. Results: Among the participating facilities (n = 219), the majority (n = 135, 61.6%) did not offer bacterial culture testing, 47 (21.5%) offered culture services only and 37 (16.9%) performed antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST). The major gaps identified among AST facilities were poor access to laboratory information management technology (LIMT) (score: 45.9%) and low uptake of external quality assessment (EQA) programs for cultures (score 67.7%). Access to laboratory technology was more than two-fold higher in facilities in urban (58.6%) relative to rural (25.0%) areas. Whilst laboratories that lacked culture services were found to have significant infrastructural gaps (average score 59.4%), facilities that performed cultures only (average score: 83.6%) and AST (average score: 82.9%) recorded significantly high scores that were very similar across areas assessed. Lack of equipment was identified as the leading challenge to the implementation of susceptibility testing among 46.8% of laboratories. Conclusions: We identified key gaps in laboratory information management technology, external quality assurance and material and equipment among the surveyed health facilities in Kenya. Our findings suggest that by investing in equipment, facilities performing cultures can be successfully upgraded to provide additional antimicrobial susceptibility testing, presenting a chance for a major leap toward improved AMR diagnostics and surveillance in the country.
AB - Background: Adequate laboratory capacity is critical in the implementation of coherent surveillance for antimicrobial resistance (AMR). We describe capacities and deficiencies in laboratory infrastructure and AMR surveillance practices among health facilities in Kenya to support progress toward broader sustainable laboratory-based AMR surveillance. Methods: A convenience sample of health facilities from both public and private sectors across the country were selected. Information was obtained cross-sectionally between 5th October and 8th December 2020 through online surveys of laboratory managers. The assessment covered quality assurance, management and dissemination of AMR data, material and equipment, staffing, microbiology competency, biosafety and certification. A scoring scheme was developed for the evaluation and interpreted as (80% and above) facility is adequate (60–79%) requires some strengthening and (<60%) needing significant strengthening. Average scores were compared across facilities in public and private sectors, rural and urban settings, as well as national, county, and community levels. Results: Among the participating facilities (n = 219), the majority (n = 135, 61.6%) did not offer bacterial culture testing, 47 (21.5%) offered culture services only and 37 (16.9%) performed antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST). The major gaps identified among AST facilities were poor access to laboratory information management technology (LIMT) (score: 45.9%) and low uptake of external quality assessment (EQA) programs for cultures (score 67.7%). Access to laboratory technology was more than two-fold higher in facilities in urban (58.6%) relative to rural (25.0%) areas. Whilst laboratories that lacked culture services were found to have significant infrastructural gaps (average score 59.4%), facilities that performed cultures only (average score: 83.6%) and AST (average score: 82.9%) recorded significantly high scores that were very similar across areas assessed. Lack of equipment was identified as the leading challenge to the implementation of susceptibility testing among 46.8% of laboratories. Conclusions: We identified key gaps in laboratory information management technology, external quality assurance and material and equipment among the surveyed health facilities in Kenya. Our findings suggest that by investing in equipment, facilities performing cultures can be successfully upgraded to provide additional antimicrobial susceptibility testing, presenting a chance for a major leap toward improved AMR diagnostics and surveillance in the country.
KW - antimicrobial susceptibility testing
KW - Kenya
KW - laboratory infrastructure
KW - quality assurance
KW - surveillance of antimicrobial resistance
U2 - 10.3389/fpubh.2022.1003178
DO - 10.3389/fpubh.2022.1003178
M3 - Article
C2 - 36518572
AN - SCOPUS:85144067865
SN - 2296-2565
VL - 10
JO - Frontiers in public health
JF - Frontiers in public health
M1 - 1003178
ER -