Evidence Hub

Antibiotic use among patients admitted to tertiary hospitals in Uganda: a trend analysis of 2020-2023 point prevalence surveys

Nakasendwa S, Mayito J, Twemanye V, Tumwine C, Kiggundu R, Galiwango R, Nuwamanya E, Muleme J et al.

BMJ open, 2026

15,154 participants · 1 citation

Abstract

Objective: Limited data exist on temporal changes in antibiotic use in low and middle-income countries. We evaluated trends in antibiotic use at tertiary hospitals in Uganda.

Design: Retrospective trend analysis of a repeated point prevalence survey (PPS).

Setting and participants: This study utilised antibiotic use data from quarterly PPS conducted among inpatients at nine regional referral hospitals in Uganda between October 2020 and December 2023.

Outcome measures: We determined the proportions of antibiotic use, prescriptions guided by culture and sensitivity tests (CST), WHO AWaRe (Access, Watch and Reserve) categories, and prescriptions without documented indication. Linear regression was used to derive slope coefficients and 95% confidence interval (CI).

Results: Of 15,154 patients surveyed, 8,892 (58.7%) received systemic antibiotics. The median age was 23 years (IQR: 11-38), 5,338 (60.5%) were female, and 4,583 (51.5%) were on treatment for infectious syndromes, including sepsis (1,400, 15.7%) and pneumonia (867, 9.8%). The drug utilisation index (DU75) consisted of ceftriaxone, metronidazole, gentamicin and ampicillin, which accounted for 76.9% (12,291/15,989) of total antibiotic use. The distribution of prescribed antibiotics was 46.6% Access, 45.5% Watch, 0.1% Reserve and 7.7% unrecommended combinations. Overall, 5,402 (60.8%) prescriptions were aligned with national guidelines, 2,147 (24.1%) prescriptions were issued without an indication, and CST guided 271…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 15,154 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