Reevaluating Neonatal Erythromycin Prophylaxis Policy Amid Advances in Sexually Transmitted Infection Screening,...

Long-standing mandates in the United States require universal ophthalmic prophylaxis with erythromycin for all neonates, although recent evidence has led to reconsideration of this practice. This intervention was originally adopted to prevent blindness caused by Neisseria gonorrhoeae (gonococcal ophthalmia neonatorum, GON) and Chlamydia trachomatis (chlamydial ophthalmia neonatorum, CON). Today, however, prenatal screening and treatment have rendered such infections rare at birth. Current population data indicate that GON is exceedingly uncommon in the United States and that erythromycin is ineffective at preventing CON. Moreover, issues regarding antimicrobial resistance, medication shortages, and early microbiome disruption call into question the rationale for maintaining this policy raise concerns that question the continued rationale for this policy. In this analysis, we integrate contemporary epidemiologic and policy evidence to support the conclusion that continuing universal prophylaxis provides minimal clinical benefit, exposes newborns to unnecessary antibiotics, and conflicts with modern principles of antibiotic stewardship. Risk-based prevention models already adopted in many high-income countries offer a safer and more evidence-aligned alternative. Nurses are uniquely positioned to lead this transition through patient education, antibiotic stewardship, and advocacy for evidence-based neonatal care.