Suchergebnisse

AbstractThe spread of antimicrobial-resistant pathogens is a global health concern. Most studies report high levels of antimicrobial resistance genes (ARGs) in the aquatic environment; however, levels associated with sediments are limited. This study aimed to investigate the distribution of ARGs in the sediments and water of the Akaki river in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. The diversity and abundance of 84 ARGs and 116 clinically important bacteria were evaluated from the sediments and water collected from five sites in the Akaki river. Most of the ARGs were found in the city close to anthropogenic activities. Water samples collected in the middle catchment of the river contained 71–75% of targeted ARGs, with genes encoding aminoglycoside acetyltransferase (aac(6)-Ib-cr), aminoglycoside adenylyl transferase (aadA1), β-lactamase (blaOXA-10), quinolone resistance S (qnrS), macrolide efflux protein A (mefA), and tetracycline resistance (tetA), were detected at all sampling sites. Much fewer ARGs were detected in all sediments, and those near the hospitals had the highest diversity and level. Despite the lower levels and diversity, there were no unique ARGs detected in the sediments that were also not detected in the waters. A wide range of clinically relevant pathogens were also detected in the Akaki river. The findings suggest that the water phase, rather than the sediments in the Akaki river, is a potential conduit for the spread of ARGs and antibiotic-resistant bacteria.

OBJECTIVE: Globally, interest in excellence has grown exponentially, with public and private institutions shifting their attention from meeting targets to achieving excellence. Centres of Excellence (CoEs) are standing at the forefront of healthcare, research and innovations responding to the world's most complex problems. However, their potential is hindered by conceptual ambiguity. We conducted a global synthesis of the evidence to conceptualise CoEs. DESIGN: Scoping review, following Arksey and O'Malley's framework and methodological enhancement by Levac et al and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, Google Scholar and the Google engine until 1 January 2021. ELIGIBILITY: Articles that describe CoE as the main theme. RESULTS: The search resulted in 52 161 potential publications, with 78 articles met the eligibility criteria. The 78 articles were from 33 countries, of which 35 were from the USA, 3 each from Nigeria, South Africa, Spain and India, and 2 each from Ethiopia, Canada, Russia, Colombia, Sweden, Greece and Peru. The rest 17 were from various countries. The articles involved six thematic areas—healthcare, education, research, industry, information technology and general concepts on CoE. The analysis documented success stories of using the brand 'CoE'—an influential brand to stimulate best practices. We identified 12 essential foundations of CoE—specialised expertise; infrastructure; innovation; high-impact research; quality service; accreditation or standards; leadership; organisational structure; strategy; collaboration and partnership; sustainable funding or financial mechanisms; and entrepreneurship. CONCLUSIONS: CoEs have significant scientific, political, economic and social impacts. However, there are inconsistent use and self-designation of the brand without approval by an independent, external process of evaluation and with high ambiguity between 'CoEs' and the ordinary 'institutions' or ...

Objective- Globally, interest in excellence has grown exponentially, with public and private institutions shifting their attention from meeting targets to achieving excellence. Centres of Excellence (CoEs) are standing at the forefront of healthcare, research and innovations responding to the world's most complex problems. However, their potential is hindered by conceptual ambiguity. We conducted a global synthesis of the evidence to conceptualise CoEs. Design- Scoping review, following Arksey and O'Malley's framework and methodological enhancement by Levac et al and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews. Data sources- PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, Google Scholar and the Google engine until 1 January 2021. Eligibility- Articles that describe CoE as the main theme. Results- The search resulted in 52 161 potential publications, with 78 articles met the eligibility criteria. The 78 articles were from 33 countries, of which 35 were from the USA, 3 each from Nigeria, South Africa, Spain and India, and 2 each from Ethiopia, Canada, Russia, Colombia, Sweden, Greece and Peru. The rest 17 were from various countries. The articles involved six thematic areas—healthcare, education, research, industry, information technology and general concepts on CoE. The analysis documented success stories of using the brand 'CoE'—an influential brand to stimulate best practices. We identified 12 essential foundations of CoE—specialised expertise; infrastructure; innovation; high-impact research; quality service; accreditation or standards; leadership; organisational structure; strategy; collaboration and partnership; sustainable funding or financial mechanisms; and entrepreneurship. Conclusions- CoEs have significant scientific, political, economic and social impacts. However, there are inconsistent use and self-designation of the brand without approval by an independent, external process of evaluation and with high ambiguity between 'CoEs' and the ordinary 'institutions' or ...