Abstract
Introduction Disease surveillance is an essential element of an effective response to antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Associations between AMR cases and area-level drivers such as remoteness and socio-economic disadvantage have been observed, but spatial associations when modelling routinely collected surveillance data that are often imperfect or missing have not been previously possible.
Aim We aimed to use spatial modelling to adjust for area-level variables and to enhance AMR surveillance for missing or sparse data, in an effort to provide clinicians and policy makers with more actionable epidemiological information.
Methods We used monthly antimicrobial susceptibility data for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) from a surveillance system in Australia. MRSA was assessed for the effects of age, sex, socio-economic and access to healthcare services indices by fitting Bayesian spatial models.
Results We analysed data for 77, 760 MRSA isolates between 2016 and 2022. We observed significant spatial heterogeneity in MRSA and found significant associations with age, sex and remoteness, but not socio-economic status. MRSA infections were highest in adult females aged 16-60 living in very remote regions and lowest in senior males aged 60+ years living in inner regional areas..
Conclusion Current disease surveillance approaches for antimicrobial resistant infections have limited spatial comparability, are not timely, and at risk of sampling bias. Bayesian spatial models borrow information from neighbouring regions to adjust for unbalanced geographical information and can fill information gaps of current MRSA surveillance. Assessment of disease spatial variation is especially critical in settings which have diverse geography, dispersed populations or in regions with limited microbiological capacity.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
The authors received no specific funding for this work.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This study was conducted and approved by the Human Research Ethics Committee of the Northern Territory Department of Health and Menzies School of Health Research (HREC-2018-3084), CSIRO Health and Medical Human Research Ethics Committee (CHMHREC 2020_090_RR).
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Models used for our study are available in the supplementary documents. Other data can be requested directly from authors, where appropriate.
