economic effects of environmental exposure to amrlow-amr high-amr low-amr high-amr simulation...
TRANSCRIPT
Economic Effects of Environmental Exposure to AMR
Ramanan LaxminarayanTwitter @CDDEP
,.... enI... 0 Q) =,:::, =C E::::J C 0) ·c ...-::.·5 >,= 1:Q) cua. a.
0 I... Q) Q) a. 3:
- 00 a.
I... 0) Q) C
..0 ·-
E ::::J ..c C U
C ::::J
·- a.Q) -en cu
u C
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
2030 2030 2050 2050
Low-AMR High-AMR Low-AMR High-AMR
Simulation scenario and year
• Low-income countries
• Rest of the world (all other countries)
Additional people falling into extreme poverty:
nearly 8 million by 2030 in the low-AMR case;
more then 28 million by 2050 in the high-AMR case
Source: Simulation results and author's calculations.
,(1) - ......... Souroes of antibiot ics and 1resi:stant bacteria
The roles of the environment in antibiot ic iresist ance development .. ,,,... ............................................. __ >:: • • • • • ~- ~ .....it ...... • • • • • • • • -<-- ...... • • • ·•
•• ••
....._ IEvol'utionary proce sses ,(2) • • • • • r in tlhe enrvir1onment
,( 3) • • _ ......._ IExpos ure 1routes to .,,..- h umans
,(4) •• • •••• • Poss,ib le interventio'n barll'liers
Pathways of impact
• Via human health• Drug resistant infections• Long term effects of antibiotic exposure
• Via animal health
Benefit-cost of interventions – open questions• Should we focus on measures primarily protecting the environment
from exposure to selective agents, resistant bacteria and genes, ormeasures that protect humans from resistant bacteria and resistancedeterminants of environmental origin?
• Does it make economic sense to focus at the regional or national levelor focus on certain regions of the world, even if distant?
• Should we prioritize investments in waste management in certainsectors, such as clinical or pharmaceutical facilities over others?
• How do investments in behavior change compare against investmentsin technological interventions?
Anthropological and socioeconomic factors contributing to
global antimicrobial resistance: a univariate and
multivariable analysis
+~® CrossMark
Peter Collignon, John) Beggs, Timothy RWalsh, Sumanth Gandra, Ramanan Laxminarayan m Summary Background Understanding of the factors driving global antimicrobial resistance is limited. We analysed antimicrobial resistance and antibiotic consumption worldwide versus many potential contributing factors .
LancetPlanetHealth2018;
2:e39S-4o5
•
100
90
80
• 70
• • - 60 ~· • • • ~
Q)' 0 • ~ 50 f!:1.
,f,,,I' l,j')l
·;;, CV
0::: 40
• • • • • • • -- • • 30 • • • • 20
10
0 0 .2-0 4.0
•
• ••
• • • •• •
• • •
•
•
• •
.• • • •
• •
• Jf=-0· 60i]3 x+39·413 R2-o.0131
·-•
Antibiot ic (onsuim;ption (DDD)1
• •
• •
20-0
Figure 2'; Esd1,erichia coli resista11c1e fevelis. for filu o ri0quinol!o 11e-s and t h i rd~ge:nrerati o 11 cephallos-por1i ms. comp a r,ed with a rnt ilbi otic consumpt ion
Usage (standard· sed)
Governance i nd@x
Health expenditure i r1dex
G [)p per c · pita 1(stand · rdis@d~
Education index
Inf rastrudbu re i r1dex
Climate ir1dex
Effect om "'stance ate of 1 SD i rncrease i rn ea h explarnatol}' va · ab e (logirt)
--0-88
-7·89
-5·54
fi-62
7·93
-lfi-84
2·01
0·54
GDP= gross domestic product. R2 =coeffide nt of determi r1at i'on.
0·64
0·025
0·093
0·030
0·058
0·014
0·33
Table 1; tfe iof cha es in i rndi e r s sta e of Esdl,eric:hia ooJJ to tl ·. -g e me rat ion c phal,ospo ri ns fl oroqu o ornes
Wat
er
Patients
Healthcare Workers
Acinetobacter spp.Candida spp.
Citrobacter spp.Coagulase negative staphylococci (CONS)
Enterobacter spp.Escherichia coli
Klebsiella pneumoniaPseudomonas spp.
Stahylococcus aureus
WASH and maternal/newborn health in low-and middle—income countries• Assess the impact of improvements in water, sanitation, and hygiene
(WASH) on reducing bacterial HAIs in mothers giving birth and in their neonates in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs)
• Develop cost-effectiveness estimates for WASH improvements in LMICs
• Identify gaps where research on WASH interventions can improve health-outcomes for pregnant mothers and neonates in LMICs
Cost effectiveness of interventionsTable 14. I11ere1nental Cost-Effectiveness l.nte1"'\rention Scena1•io
DeatJ1s/ fufections/ DALYs Averted
Inc1•en1e11tal Cost(INR)
lnc1•e1ne11tal Cost($) ICER(INR) ICER($)
Deaths
1 -> baseline 145,369 4.5 32,405 210,680 46,964 5-> 1 319,881 7.0 45,858 46,3,596 66,461 2-> 1 ,377,604 3.2 117,704 547,252 170,.s,86
3 -> 2 l , 88,9, 736 101.0 18,.716 2,,7.38, 74 7 27,124
4-> .2 2 ,.3S3,905 104.3 22,567 3,,411,457 32,705 Infections
1-> baseline 145,,369 14.1 10,,337 210,6.80 14,982
5-> 1 319,881 .21.1 1.5,,142 463,596 .21,945,
2-> 1 ,377,604 11.,3 ' 33 ., 3 9' ·2 - 547,252 4.8,293 3 -> 2 1,889,736 311.6 6,065 2,73.8,747 8 ,790 4-> .2 2,,353,905 322.4 7,301 3,,411,457 10,581
Study Conclusions
1. WASH interventions can be effective but are an expensive way ofaddressing AMR in hospitals
2. Water interventions are necessary because they facilitate IPC3. Without IPC, water-based interventions are not nearly effective
enough alone4. Sanitation improvements only marginally impacted HAIs5. Water-based interventions are more cost-effective than non-water-
based interventions
Disrupted Gut Bacteria Lead to Obesity
LM Cox et al., Cell 158, 705–721, August 14, 2014
Bailey et al, JAMA Pediatrics, 2014
[!] li m mg1 of 1ex pos.u re
~ 0-S ~. !...a ....... ~: 6-1:t • !CL.
11.f'l,
3 ]2-17 ii:), ~ !...a _,
]8~13 z 0 IE -- 0-5 W• E ~ a ~. 11A !...a
0 ....... U • 6-1:t !CL.
).( w• iJ.J !CL.
1Laf11 ........ ]2-17 11A ""C· ~ ft!,
~ o., ....... !...a
m cc ]8-23 -
(ti, Cl .it
0-S
6-1:t ~ ~
~ ]2-17
]8-23
CU]
•·
• I •
• • •
] .0
• • I
• • •
1.1
Rate Ratio
1...2 L3
[fil No. of exposures.
~ ~4 ~. !...a ....... ~: 3 !CL.
11.f'l,
3 2 ii:), ~ !...a _,
z :t
~4 11A E CV !...a ~. :;:::], !...a U"I•
....... U • 3 0
!CL. w • ).( !CL. bbl rl.li,
2 ~ ,:::i. 0 ft!,
ci o., !...a z CCI - :t
~4
3 >--~
;ia: 2
:t
OJ]
I I I I I I
. ,I I I I I
• 1 I I
~ I I I I I I I I I •
• • •
] .0
•
• •
•
1.1
Rate Ratio
•
12 L3
69% of children were exposed to antibiotics before end of first yearThis increase was associated with increased risk to obesity, with broad spectrum antibiotics having a more significant role.
Bailey et al, JAMA Pediatrics, 2014
~ No. of exposures.
~ ~4 ~. !..a .......
' 3 !CL.
rV,1
3 2 ii:), ~
:t
IA ,iv !..a :;:::], u,, 0 !CL.
bl.I ~ 0
ci z
~4
3 ~ ~
~ 2
:t
OJ]
I I I I I I
. ,I I I I I
• 1 I I
~ I I I
• • •
] .0
•
•
1.1 n t n t ' ·· na e R.a IQ
12
[!] li m mg1 of 1ex pos.u re
~ 0-S ~. !..a ....... :rl: 6-1:t • !CL.
rV,1
3 ]2-17 ii:), ~
]8~13 0 E
0-S
6-1:t ~ ~ .;:
]2-17
]8-13
L3 CU]
•·
• I • I I I I
• • •
] .0
•
1.1
Rate Ratio
1...2 L3
Costs of childhood obesity in the United States
On in five school age children (about 11 million children in total) is classified as obese according to CDC. If we project a 5% increase in childhood obesity rates attributable environmental exposures, the lifetime cost would be in the order of about $9.2 billion (2011 dollars) in the US alone.
Thank you