Diagnostic Stewardship for Combating Antimicrobial Resistance in Resource-Limited Healthcare Settings: From Better Testing to Better Treatment
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Background: Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is sustained not only by inappropriate antimicrobial use but also by diagnostic failure. Unnecessary testing can trigger treatment of colonization or contamination, whereas absent, delayed, or poorly communicated testing encourages prolonged empirical broad-spectrum therapy. Diagnostic stewardship seeks to ensure that the right test is obtained from the right patient, at the right time, and that its result is interpreted and acted upon correctly.
Objective: To synthesize the role of diagnostic stewardship in AMR control, with emphasis on implementation in resource-limited healthcare settings.
Methods: A targeted narrative review of peer-reviewed literature and World Health Organization guidance published primarily from 2015 through October 2026 was undertaken. Evidence concerning conventional microbiology, biomarkers, rapid and point-of-care tests, clinical decision support, laboratory strengthening, and linkage with antimicrobial stewardship was prioritized.
Findings: Diagnostic tools have greatest clinical value when embedded in a pathway that links appropriate test selection and specimen quality to timely reporting and antimicrobial-stewardship action. Rapid tests paired with stewardship can shorten time to optimal treatment and may improve survival in bloodstream infection. Lower-cost approaches—including specimen criteria, reflex testing, selective reporting, clinical decision support, and locally adapted laboratory quality systems—can reduce low-value testing and improve use of existing capacity. Major constraints include weak laboratory infrastructure, supply instability, workforce shortages, fragmented clinical-laboratory communication, and limited evaluation of patient-centered outcomes.
Conclusion: Diagnostic stewardship should be treated as a clinical system rather than a technology-purchasing exercise. Resource-limited facilities can begin with high-burden syndromes, strengthen the pre-analytic and post-analytic pathway, connect results to treatment decisions, and monitor safety alongside antimicrobial use.
Article statistics
- Abstract views
- 14
- PDF Downloads
- 4
- Total views
- 18
Downloads
Article Details
Section
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
All articles published in Transdisciplinary Medical, Clinical and Health Research (TMCHR) are licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).
This license allows others to share, copy, distribute, and adapt the work, provided that proper credit is given to the original author(s) and the source.
Authors retain copyright and grant Transdisciplinary Medical, Clinical and Health Research (TMCHR) the right of first publication.
How to Cite
References
1. GBD 2021 Antimicrobial Resistance Collaborators. Global burden of bacterial antimicrobial resistance 1990–2021: a systematic analysis with forecasts to 2050. Lancet. 2024;404(10459):1199–1226. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(24)01867-1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(24)01867-1
2. Fleming KA, Horton S, Wilson ML, et al. The Lancet Commission on diagnostics: transforming access to diagnostics. Lancet. 2021;398(10315):1997–2050. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00673-5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00673-5
3. World Health Organization. Diagnostic stewardship: a guide to implementation in antimicrobial resistance surveillance sites. Geneva: WHO; 2016. WHO/DGO/AMR/2016.3. Available from: WHO publication page.
4. World Health Organization Regional Office for the Western Pacific. Strengthening clinical diagnostic stewardship in the Western Pacific Region: a practical manual. Manila: WHO Regional Office for the Western Pacific; 2026. ISBN 978-92-9-062136-2. Available from: WHO publication page.
5. Dik JWH, Poelman R, Friedrich AW, et al. An integrated stewardship model: antimicrobial, infection prevention and diagnostic (AID). Future Microbiol. 2016;11(1):93–102. doi:10.2217/fmb.15.99. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2217/fmb.15.99
6. Messacar K, Parker SK, Todd JK, Dominguez SR. Implementation of rapid molecular infectious disease diagnostics: the role of diagnostic and antimicrobial stewardship. J Clin Microbiol. 2017;55(3):715–723. doi:10.1128/JCM.02264-16. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.02264-16
7. Moore LSP, Villegas MV, Wenzler E, et al. Rapid diagnostic test value and implementation in antimicrobial stewardship across low-to-middle and high-income countries: a mixed-methods review. Infect Dis Ther. 2023;12(6):1445–1463. doi:10.1007/s40121-023-00815-z. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40121-023-00815-z
8. Yansouni CP, Seifu D, Libman M, et al. A feasible laboratory-strengthening intervention yielding a sustainable clinical bacteriology sector to support antimicrobial stewardship in a large referral hospital in Ethiopia. Front Public Health. 2020;8:258. doi:10.3389/fpubh.2020.00258. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2020.00258
9. Do NTT, Ta NTD, Tran NTH, et al. Point-of-care C-reactive protein testing to reduce inappropriate use of antibiotics for non-severe acute respiratory infections in Vietnamese primary health care: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet Glob Health. 2016;4(9):e633–e641. doi:10.1016/S2214-109X(16)30142-5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(16)30142-5
10. Schuetz P, Wirz Y, Sager R, et al. Effect of procalcitonin-guided antibiotic treatment on mortality in acute respiratory infections: a patient level meta-analysis. Lancet Infect Dis. 2018;18(1):95–107. doi:10.1016/S1473-3099(17)30592-3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(18)30016-1
11. Peri AM, Chatfield MD, Ling W, Furuya-Kanamori L, Harris PNA, Paterson DL. Rapid diagnostic tests and antimicrobial stewardship programs for the management of bloodstream infection: what is their relative contribution to improving clinical outcomes? A systematic review and network meta-analysis. Clin Infect Dis. 2024;79(2):502–515. doi:10.1093/cid/ciae234. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciae234
12. Pliakos EE, Andreatos N, Shehadeh F, Ziakas PD, Mylonakis E. The cost-effectiveness of rapid diagnostic testing for the diagnosis of bloodstream infections with or without antimicrobial stewardship. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2018;31(3):e00095-17. doi:10.1128/CMR.00095-17. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1128/CMR.00095-17
13. Hojat LS, Saade EA, Hernandez AV, Donskey CJ, Deshpande A. Can electronic clinical decision support systems improve the diagnosis of urinary tract infections? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Open Forum Infect Dis. 2023;10(1):ofac691. doi:10.1093/ofid/ofac691. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofac691
14. Coffey KC, Claeys K, Morgan DJ. Diagnostic stewardship for urine cultures. Infect Dis Clin North Am. 2024;38(2):255–266. doi:10.1016/j.idc.2024.03.004. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.idc.2024.03.004
15. Minejima E, Wong-Beringer A. Implementation of rapid diagnostics with antimicrobial stewardship. Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther. 2016;14(11):1065–1075. doi:10.1080/14787210.2016.1233814. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14787210.2016.1233814
16. World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe. Antimicrobial stewardship interventions: a practical guide. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe; 2021. ISBN 978-92-890-5626-7. Available from: WHO publication page.
17. Bernal JL, Cummins S, Gasparrini A. Interrupted time series regression for the evaluation of public health interventions: a tutorial. Int J Epidemiol. 2017;46(1):348–355. doi:10.1093/ije/dyw098. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyw098