Background: Effective contact tracing is labor intensive and time sensitive during the COVID-19 pandemic, but also essential in the absence of effective treatment and vaccines. Singapore launched the first Bluetooth-based contact tracing app—TraceTogether—in March 2020 to augment Singapore’s contact tracing capabilities.Objective: This study aims to compare the performance of the contact tracing app—TraceTogether—with that of a wearable tag-based real-time locating system (RTLS) and to validate them against the electronic medical records at the National Centre for Infectious Diseases (NCID), the national referral center for COVID-19 screening.Methods: All patients and physicians in the NCID screening center were issued RTLS tags (CADI Scientific) for contact tracing. In total, 18 physicians were deployed to the NCID screening center from May 10 to May 20, 2020. The physicians activated the TraceTogether app (version 1.6; GovTech) on their smartphones during shifts and urged their patients to use the app. We compared patient contacts identified by TraceTogether and those identified by RTLS tags within the NCID vicinity during physicians’ 10-day posting. We also validated both digital contact tracing tools by verifying the physician-patient contacts with the electronic medical records of 156 patients who attended the NCID screening center over a 24-hour time frame within the study period.Results: RTLS tags had a high sensitivity of 95.3% for detecting patient contacts identified either by the system or TraceTogether while TraceTogether had an overall sensitivity of 6.5% and performed significantly better on Android phones than iPhones (Android: 9.7%, iPhone: 2.7%; P<.001). When validated against the electronic medical records, RTLS tags had a sensitivity of 96.9% and specificity of 83.1%, while TraceTogether only detected 2 patient contacts with physicians who did not attend to them.Conclusions: TraceTogether had a much lower sensitivity than RTLS tags for identifying patient contacts in a clinical setting. Although the tag-based RTLS performed well for contact tracing in a clinical setting, its implementation in the community would be more challenging than TraceTogether. Given the uncertainty of the adoption and capabilities of contact tracing apps, policy makers should be cautioned against overreliance on such apps for contact tracing. Nonetheless, leveraging technology to augment conventional manual contact tracing is a necessary move for returning some normalcy to life during the long haul of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Objectives: Understanding factors influencing inappropriate antibiotic use can guide the design of interventions to improve antibiotic practices and reduce antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Methods: A nationally representative cross-sectional survey (N = 2004) was conducted between November 2020 and January 2021. Knowledge of antibiotic use and AMR using the World Health Organization’s Multi-Country AMR Survey questionnaire, and antibiotic practices were examined. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify factors associated with inappropriate antibiotic use and examine effect measure modifications. Results: After adjusting for potential confounding, poor knowledge of antibiotic use was associated with a 3x increased odds of inappropriate antibiotic use in adults aged ≥50 years (aOR 3.11, 95% CI [2.24–4.32]), 5× increased odds in those aged 35–49 years (aOR 4.88, 95% CI [3.32–7.16]), and 7× increased odds in those aged 21–34 years (aOR 6.58, 95% CI [4.19–10.33]). While there was no statistically significant association in adults aged ≥50 years, poor knowledge of AMR increased the odds of inappropriate antibiotic use by 4 times in adults aged 35–49 years (aOR 3.73, 95% CI [1.53–9.11]) and 5 times in those aged 21–34 years (aOR 4.90, 95% CI [1.84–13.02]). Conclusions: Targeted educational interventions for specific age groups are needed in conjunction with empowering the public with knowledge of antibiotic use and AMR.

Antimicrobial stewardship programmes (ASPs) in hospitals are predominantly led by specific ASP physicians and pharmacists. Limited studies have been conducted to appreciate non-ASP-trained hospital pharmacists’ perspectives on their roles in antimicrobial stewardship. Focus group discussions (FGDs) were conducted with 74 pharmacists, purposively sampled from the 3 largest acute-care public hospitals in Singapore, to explore facilitators and barriers faced by them in antimicrobial stewardship. Applied thematic analysis was conducted and codes were categorised using the social–ecological model (SEM). At the intrapersonal level, pharmacists identified themselves as reviewers for drug safety before dispensing, confining to a restricted advisory role due to lack of clinical knowledge, experience, and empowerment to contribute actively to physicians’ prescribing decisions. At the interpersonal level, pharmacists expressed difficulties conveying their opinions and recommendations on antibiotic therapy to physicians despite frequent communications, but they assumed critical roles as educators for patients and their caregivers on proper antibiotic use. At the organisational level, in-house antibiotic guidelines supported pharmacists’ antibiotic interventions and recommendations. At the community level, pharmacists were motivated to improve low public awareness and knowledge on antibiotic use and antimicrobial resistance. These findings provide important insights into the gaps to be addressed in order to harness the untapped potential of hospital pharmacists and fully engage them in antimicrobial stewardship.

Background: The misuse and overuse of antibiotics contribute to the acceleration of antimicrobial resistance (AMR), but public knowledge on appropriate antibiotic use and AMR remained low despite ongoing health promotion efforts. App gamification has gained traction in recent years for health promotion and to affect change in health behaviors. Hence, we developed an evidence-based serious game app “SteWARdS Antibiotic Defence” to educate the public on appropriate antibiotic use and AMR and address knowledge gaps. Objective: We aim to evaluate the effectiveness of the “SteWARdS Antibiotic Defence” app in improving the knowledge of, attitude toward, and perception (KAP) of appropriate antibiotic use and AMR among the public. The primary objective is to assess the changes in KAP of antibiotic use and AMR in our participants, while the secondary objectives are to assess the extent of user engagement with the app and the level of user satisfaction in using the app. Methods: Our study is a parallel 2-armed randomized controlled trial with a 1:1 allocation. We plan to recruit 400 participants (patients or their caregivers) aged 18-65 years from government-funded primary care clinics in Singapore. Participants are randomized in blocks of 4 and into the intervention or control group. Participants in the intervention group are required to download the “SteWARdS Antibiotic Defence” app on their smartphones and complete a game quest within 2 weeks. Users will learn about appropriate antibiotic use and effective methods to recover from uncomplicated upper respiratory tract infections by interacting with the nonplayer characters and playing 3 minigames in the app. The control group will not receive any intervention. Results: The primary study outcome is the change in participants’ KAP toward antibiotic use and AMR 6-10 weeks post intervention or 6-10 weeks from baseline for the control group (web-based survey). We will also assess the knowledge level of participants immediately after the participant completes the game quest (in the app). The secondary study outcomes are the user engagement level (tracked by the app) and satisfaction level of playing the game (via the immediate postgame survey). The satisfaction survey will also collect participants’ feedback on the game app. Conclusions: Our proposed study provides a unique opportunity to assess the effectiveness of a serious game app in public health education. We anticipate possible ceiling effects and selection bias in our study and have planned to perform subgroup analyses to adjust for confounding factors. The app intervention will benefit a larger population if it is proven to be effective and acceptable to users. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05445414; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05445414 International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/45833