1. Ecology
  2. Microbiology and Infectious Disease
Download icon

Metapopulation ecology links antibiotic resistance, consumption, and patient transfers in a network of hospital wards

Research Article
  • Cited 0
  • Views 586
  • Annotations
Cite this article as: eLife 2020;9:e54795 doi: 10.7554/eLife.54795

Abstract

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a global threat. A better understanding of how antibiotic use and between-ward patient transfers (or connectivity) impact population-level AMR in hospital networks can help optimize antibiotic stewardship and infection control strategies. Here, we used a metapopulation framework to explain variations in the incidence of infections caused by 7 major bacterial species and their drug-resistant variants in a network of 357 hospital wards. We found that ward-level antibiotic consumption volume had a stronger influence on the incidence of the more resistant pathogens, while connectivity had the most influence on hospital-endemic species and carbapenem-resistant pathogens. Piperacillin-tazobactam consumption was the strongest predictor of the cumulative incidence of infections resistant to empirical sepsis therapy. Our data provide evidence that both antibiotic use and connectivity measurably influence hospital AMR. Finally, we provide a ranking of key antibiotics by their estimated population-level impact on AMR that might help inform antimicrobial stewardship strategies.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Julie Teresa Shapiro

    CIRI INSERM U1111, University of Lyon, Lyon, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Gilles Leboucher

    Département de Pharmacie, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-7043-9834
  3. Anne-Florence Myard-Dury

    Pôle de Santé Publique, Département d'Information Médicale, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Pascale Girardo

    Institut des Agents Infectieux, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Anatole Luzzati

    Institut des Agents Infectieux, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Melissa Mary

    Institut des Agents Infectieux, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Jean-François Sauzon

    Institut des Agents Infectieux, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Bénédicte Lafay

    Laboratoire de Biométrie et Biologie Evolutive, CNRS, Villeurbanne, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-5783-5269
  9. Olivier Dauwalder

    Institut des Agents Infectieux, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Frederic Laurent

    CIRI INSERM U1111, University of Lyon, Lyon, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Gerard Lina

    CIRI INSERM U1111, University of Lyon, Lyon, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Christian Chidiac

    Service des Maladies Infectieuses et Tropicales, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Sandrine Couray-Targe

    Pôle de Santé Publique, Département d'Information Médicale, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. François Vandenesch

    CIRI INSERM U1111, University of Lyon, Lyon, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  15. Jean-Pierre Flandrois

    Laboratoire de Biométrie et Biologie Evolutive, CNRS, Villeurbanne, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  16. Jean-Philippe Rasigade

    CIRI INSERM U1111, University of Lyon, Lyon, France
    For correspondence
    jean-philippe.rasigade@univ-lyon1.fr
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-8264-0452

Funding

Fondation Innovations en Infectiologie (R18037CC)

  • Jean-Philippe Rasigade

French Laboratory of Excellence project ECOFECT (ANR-11-LABX-0048)

  • Julie Teresa Shapiro
  • Gilles Leboucher
  • François Vandenesch
  • Jean-Philippe Rasigade

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Ben S Cooper, Mahidol University, Thailand

Publication history

  1. Received: December 30, 2019
  2. Accepted: October 12, 2020
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: October 27, 2020 (version 1)

Copyright

© 2020, Shapiro et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 586
    Page views
  • 91
    Downloads
  • 0
    Citations

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Crossref, PubMed Central, Scopus.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Download citations (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

  1. Further reading

Further reading

    1. Ecology
    Kirby L Mills, Nyeema C Harris
    Research Article

    Wildlife respond to human presence by adjusting their temporal niche, possibly modifying encounter rates among species and trophic dynamics that structure communities. We assessed wildlife diel activity responses to human presence and consequential changes in predator-prey overlap using 11,111 detections of 3 large carnivores and 11 ungulates across 21,430 camera trap-nights in West Africa. Over two-thirds of species exhibited diel responses to mainly diurnal human presence, with ungulate nocturnal activity increasing by 7.1%. Rather than traditional pairwise predator-prey diel comparisons, we considered spatiotemporally explicit predator access to several prey resources to evaluate community-level trophic responses to human presence. Although leopard prey access was not affected by humans, lion and spotted hyena access to three prey species significantly increased when prey increased their nocturnal activity to avoid humans. Human presence considerably influenced the composition of available prey, with implications for prey selection, demonstrating how humans perturb ecological processes via behavioral modifications.

    1. Ecology
    2. Evolutionary Biology
    Susanne RK Zajitschek et al.
    Research Article

    Biomedical and clinical sciences are experiencing a renewed interest in the fact that males and females differ in many anatomic, physiological, and behavioral traits. Sex differences in trait variability, however, are yet to receive similar recognition. In medical science, mammalian females are assumed to have higher trait variability due to estrous cycles (the 'estrus-mediated variability hypothesis'); historically in biomedical research, females have been excluded for this reason. Contrastingly, evolutionary theory and associated data support the 'greater male variability hypothesis'. Here, we test these competing hypotheses in 218 traits measured in >26,900 mice, using meta-analysis methods. Neither hypothesis could universally explain patterns in trait variability. Sex-bias in variability was trait-dependent. While greater male variability was found in morphological traits, females were much more variable in immunological traits. Sex-specific variability has eco-evolutionary ramifications including sex-dependent responses to climate change, as well as statistical implications including power analysis considering sex difference in variance.