There has been a large number of bacteria bequeathed with the title of "superbug" - usually by the press - in recent times. These include - not in any order of importance - MRSA, VRE, penicillin-resistant Streptococcus pneumoniae, multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii and Pseudomonas aeruginosa, ESBL (extended-spectrum beta-lactamase)-producing Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae, KPC (Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase)-producing K. pneumoniae and E. coli, and lately, NDM-1 (New Delhi metallo-beta-lactamase)-producing K. pneumoniae. The term "superbug" connotes antibiotic resistance rather than hyper-virulence, a common public misconception. Some isolates of Acinetobacter baumannii are resistant to all known antibiotics, but this is a relatively weak opportunistic pathogen, largely incapable of causing infections in healthy individuals (although fulminant infections continue to occur in ICU patients, burns patients, or hospitalized patients with various tubes sticking in and out of them). On the other hand, the pneumococcus - while not particularly antibiotic resistant - can infect and kill individuals of all ages and health states (and therefore the critical importance of vaccination in childhood or when immunocompromised).
Generally, when a bacterium first develops resistance to an antibiotic, a fitness cost is imposed on the organism that comes from maintaining a new and additional "process" (that may well be alien to the bacterium - many of the antibiotic resistance genes found in bacteria capable of causing human disease are actually horizontally transferred to them from other bacterial species that may not be pathogenic). One inexact analogy would be the slowing down of your computer (especially if old) when you are running several applications at the same time. The bacterium then seems to be less capable of causing infections, a phenomenon observed with organisms like MRSA or multidrug-resistant tuberculosis when these first appeared. However, this fitness cost is not by any means static: after a period of time, the bacterium generally adapts to this and resumes "normal function" when causing infections.
As an example, when MRSA first appeared in the 1960's, physicians and scientists observed that infections only took place in the hospital setting among immunocompromised patients, and the organism disappeared after discharge from the hospital (this may take up to a year, however), replaced by other staphylococci from the community. For the longest time, this was held to be true until community-associated MRSA appeared in the late '80s and '90s. It took a long time for the scientific and medical community to actually believe that MRSA can cause infections in healthy individuals outside the hospital setting - something that most young doctors today may find hard to imagine, particularly with what we know about evolution. How did the organism evolve to do this? By replacing larger and "clunkier" methicillin resistance gene cassettes with more streamlined and smaller versions, and by assembling heterogeneous cell walls made with a variety of penicillin-binding proteins rather than homogeneous cell walls comprising mostly of the alien PBP-2' that confers methicillin resistance. Such changes enabled CA-MRSA to compete successfully with other staphylococci in the community setting, and to cause infections even in healthy individuals, resulting in outbreaks in almost all continents worldwide.
Next up: NDM-1 and why this is (IMHO) the most important antibiotic resistance phenomenon to have emerged after MRSA. Or you can look it up on Wikipedia.
12 comments:
There is little point in educating the doctors more.
This is now the patient centric era.
In primary care, patients DEMAND antibiotics for every cold and flu. This leads to build up of antibiotic resistance.
Unless you legislate and put in place punitive measures for doctors who indiscriminately prescribe antibiotics or spend more effort educating the PUBLIC on their ridiculously misplaced beliefs and expectations, the problem of antibiotic resistance in Singapore is going to continue to sky rocket.
Yup
The best way is to separate prescribing and dispensing.
This way doctors will have no incentives to prescribe antibiotics.
Even if they prescribe antibiotics, the pharmacists can then refuse to dispense antibiotics if they think it is a viral infection.
Let's stop antibiotics resistance before it is too late.
Restrict the powers of doctors and empower the pharmacists :)
reply to anon @ 19/9/10 1240H
might as well have pharmacists run the wards and consult rooms while doc staff the pharmacy then.
the key is public education, coz the main problem is that it takes 15 mins to educate one patient about antibiotic resistance (and likely still have him still demand antibiotics), but only 15 secs to say 'ok, if you insist on it, I'll give you antibiotics'.
FFS, I can't believe this troll won't give up.
A pharmacist won't bloody know if it's a viral or bacteria infection. Does he do a detailed diagnosis? Does he understand the nature of infections? Separating prescribing and dispensing will only lead to more confusion and opportunities for error. And if you think a doctor can somehow earn a lot from prescribing antibiotics, you must have failed primary school math.
Seriously, go to school and leave us alone.
This is absolutely rubbish!
Does a bloody doctor know how to dispense medication?
Doctors prescribe and pharmacists dispense
Only doctors in Singapore want to have it both ways.
Most developed countries are practicing these already.
By separating the two, unprofitable GPs will have no choice but to close shop and join the public sector.
This will help reduce competition amongs GPs and solve the medical manpower shortages in the public sector.
Win Win for all.
This will be one of the recommendation from the primary care survey 2010.
"Does a bloody doctor know how to dispense medication?"
Obviously they don't since they have been doing it for the past few decades.
"unprofitable GPs will have no choice but to close shop and join the public sector.
...
Win Win for all."
How is that a "win" for the GPs?
lol. if we separate the two I imagine my money is also going to pay the pharmacist's salary when I could just let my doctor do it by himself. you're making me pay more for my medicine. no thank you.
"This will be one of the recommendation from the primary care survey 2010."
hahaha. someone thinks he knows what's inside our survey.
to anonymous who said:
"Doctors prescribe and pharmacists dispense
Only doctors in Singapore want to have it both ways.
Most developed countries are practicing these already."
However, many of these developed countries like Australia and United States will charge at least 45 to 55 dollars, if not more, for a typical GP office consult. Plus the patient will have to pay extra prescription charges for each item. And finally they will have to pay for the medicine itself at the pharmacy. So do you really think the patients in these developed countries will pay less compared to Singapore? So, if prescriptions are only to be collected at pharmacies but the consult charges are raised from let's say $20 to $45, (not including prescription charges) will there be objections now?
Go think further before trying to condemn doctors in Singapore. I noticed that among the comments in other posts in this blog, there are many trolls trying to put down doctors. If these folks really hate doctors so much, I wonder why they don't just self medicate and not visit doctors, after all to their minds, it's a waste of their money and/or time.
Surviving Gps less competition = win
Failed Gps join as locums, public sector more salary = win
GPs in OPS less workload = win
We scholars rule the civil service.
Go study Economics before u comment!
If the aim is to control the antibiotic usage, having pharmacists as a second check will definitely help to improve medication counselling.
If cost is an issue, patients can always visit polyclinics and get a prescription to see us pharmacists and we can counsel them accordingly.
We complement busy doctors and help them counsel their patients.
BTW, MOH is likely to implement separation of prescribing and dispensing in the near future.
On the ground, we are expanding our intake of pharmacy students and recognizing more pharmacists from overseas.
Instead of complaining about higher costs, why dont you look at the value added by pharmacists?
Currently GPs have to worry about overheads and we cant deny that they do make profit on medications which is definitely not ideal since this may affect their prescribing habits.
The debate for doctors being allowed to dispense has gone on long enough.
Talk to most good GPs and doctors and they would AGREE that letting the pharmacists be the only ones who can dispense is the best way forward. It allows the doctors to do what is best. Consult. And charge for it. Less overheads, less headaches.
If MOH puts it into law, then they are the ones who decided and the patients can go look them up to complain. Trouble is that at the moment no such rule. And patients whack the doctors left right centre.
When want antibiotics, tell doctor no antibiotics I go next door. When not happy, whack doctors say they anyhow prescribe/dispense.
Some doctors are also to blame cos they are not strong enough to say no and stand with their integrity intact.
What the pharmacists can do is that they can monitor prescribing habits of certain doctors especially GPs. If a particular GP is prescribing antibiotics nearly all the time for URTIs then something is not right. Third party reporting/monitoring.
But the pharmacist cannot and should not override the doctor's prescription at the point of dispensing unless there is obvious error (this pharmacists are trained to do).
Enough of this debate. You guys are distracting from the main issue.
Don't you know the real problem is not pharmacists vs doctors? All of us healthcare workers are suffering, overworked, pushed to serve over demanding customers with over expectations.
Why?
It's the patients that need to be educated. But the administrators run hospitals and healthcare like hotel and amusement park businesses. Customer satisfaction. Whether customers are happy. To "wow" the customer.
Patients going to hospital are different from customers going to hotels and theme parks lah.
Anyway the more there is internal strife among us healthcare workers, the better and easier it is for the administrators to do what they want to do.
Post a Comment