Evidence Hub

One health perspective of antibiotic resistance in enterobacterales from Southeast Asia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Xie Y, Srivastava IM, Jing F, Ma C, Wu X, Chen Y, Du Y, Low XC et al.

Scientific reports, 2025

13,696 participants · 2 citations

Abstract

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in Enterobacterales poses serious public health, agricultural, and environmental threats. In Southeast Asia, a coordinated "One Health" approach is lacking, and fragmented evidence hampers targeted interventions. This study systematically quantify and analyse AMR prevalence across human, animal, and environmental sectors in Southeast Asia by conducting a meta-analysis of 137 observational studies from 2013 to 2023. We found that Ceftriaxone resistance in E. coli was highest in human samples (49.3%, 95% CI: 37.3-61.3; N = 2,640), followed by environmental (37.1%, 95% CI: 8.4-72.2; N = 288) and animal sources (11.2%, 95% CI: 1.6-27.9; N = 923). In humans, meropenem resistance was 13.0% in K. pneumoniae (95% CI: 2.0-31.3; N = 7,803) and 1.4% in E. coli (95% CI: 0.1-4.4; N = 13,696). Resistance increased over time in human (p = 0.009) and animal sectors (p = 0.004). blaCTX-M and blaTEM were reported across all sectors. This synthesis also highlights a critical evidence gap: most studies focused on Thailand (67) and Vietnam (42). Samples came mostly from animals (62) and humans (59), with limited multi-sector studies. Only one study assessed all four sectors (human, animal, environment, food). Our study reveals an escalating AMR crisis alongside critical research gaps across Southeast Asia. Future efforts must therefore strengthen both integrated surveillance to understand transmission and regional health systems to implement effective One Health…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 13,696 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free