-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4
Discuss and Consider Adding Surveillance of Systemic Antimycotics #4
Copy link
Copy link
Open
Labels
method changeThe issue concerns the necessity or desirability of modifying the NeoIPC Surveillance methodsThe issue concerns the necessity or desirability of modifying the NeoIPC Surveillance methodsneeds discussionFurther discussion with relevant stakeholders is required before the issue can be addressedFurther discussion with relevant stakeholders is required before the issue can be addressedpartner feedbackThe issue has been identified based on feedback from partners who have observed limitations/problemsThe issue has been identified based on feedback from partners who have observed limitations/problems
Milestone
Description
Metadata
Metadata
Assignees
Labels
method changeThe issue concerns the necessity or desirability of modifying the NeoIPC Surveillance methodsThe issue concerns the necessity or desirability of modifying the NeoIPC Surveillance methodsneeds discussionFurther discussion with relevant stakeholders is required before the issue can be addressedFurther discussion with relevant stakeholders is required before the issue can be addressedpartner feedbackThe issue has been identified based on feedback from partners who have observed limitations/problemsThe issue has been identified based on feedback from partners who have observed limitations/problems
Type
Fields
Give feedbackNo fields configured for issues without a type.
One of our principal partners has indicated a desire to collect data on antifungal therapy and prophylaxis as part of the NeoIPC Core Surveillance. This would add a process that closely resembles our current approach to collecting data on antibacterial therapy and prophylaxis.
It would be prudent to ascertain whether there is merit in including this additional element, given that the issue of antifungal resistance is currently less prevalent than that of antibiotic resistance.
If we decide to add it further questions arise:
This would not impose any burden on those who are not interested, but would preclude any external benchmarking.
This could be seen as a compromise, but it may limit the use of external benchmarking, depending on actual interest, and it would also increase the complexity of the methods.
Our current inclination is that its use is much less frequent than that of antibiotics. Furthermore, we believe that mandatory surveillance is not a significant issue. However, we recognise that our perspective may be flawed, particularly in relation to systemic prophylaxis.