Dataset Information

Impact of a clinical decision support system on antibiotic prescribing for acute respiratory infections in primary care: quasi-experimental trial.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To assess the effect of a clinical decision support system (CDSS) integrated into an electronic health record (EHR) on antibiotic prescribing for acute respiratory infections (ARIs) in primary care.

Materials and methods

Quasi-experimental design with nine intervention practices and 61 control practices in the Practice Partner Research Network, a network of practices which all use the same EHR (Practice Partner). The nine intervention practices were located in nine US states. The design included a 3-month baseline data collection period (October through December 2009) before the introduction of the intervention and 15 months of follow-up (January 2010 through March 2011). The main outcome measures were the prescribing of antibiotics in ARI episodes for which antibiotics are inappropriate and prescribing of broad-spectrum antibiotics in all ARI episodes.

Results

In adult patients, prescribing of antibiotics in ARI episodes where antibiotics are inappropriate declined more (-0.6%) among intervention practices than in control practices (+4.2%) (p=0.03). However, among adults, the CDSS intervention improved prescribing of broad-spectrum antibiotics, with a decline of 16.6% among intervention practices versus an increase of 1.1% in control practices (p<0.0001). A similar effect on broad-spectrum antibiotic prescribing was found in pediatric patients with a decline of 19.7% among intervention practices versus an increase of 0.9% in control practices (p<0.0001).

Conclusions

A CDSS embedded in an EHR had a modest effect in changing prescribing for adults where antibiotics were inappropriate but had a substantial impact on changing the overall prescribing of broad-spectrum antibiotics among pediatric and adult patients.

SUBMITTER: Mainous AG

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3638170 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Mar-Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Impact of a clinical decision support system on antibiotic prescribing for acute respiratory infections in primary care: quasi-experimental trial.

Mainous Arch G AG Lambourne Carol A CA Nietert Paul J PJ

Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA 20120703 2

<h4>Objective</h4>To assess the effect of a clinical decision support system (CDSS) integrated into an electronic health record (EHR) on antibiotic prescribing for acute respiratory infections (ARIs) in primary care.<h4>Materials and methods</h4>Quasi-experimental design with nine intervention practices and 61 control practices in the Practice Partner Research Network, a network of practices which all use the same EHR (Practice Partner). The nine intervention practices were located in nine US st ...[more]

PMID: 22759620

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundInterventions to support decision-making can reduce inappropriate antibiotic use for acute respiratory infections (ARI), but they may not be sustainable. The objective of the study is to evaluate the long-term effectiveness of a clinical decision-support system (CDSS) interposed at the time of electronic (e-) prescriptions for selected antibiotics.MethodsThis is a retrospective, observational intervention study, conducted within a large, statewide Veterans Affairs health system. Participants are outpatients with an initial visit for ARI. A CDSS was deployed upon e-prescription of selected antibiotics during the study period. From 01/2004 to 05/2006 (pre-withdrawal period), the CDSS targeted azithromycin and the fluoroquinolone gatifloxacin. From 05/2006 to 12/2011 (post-withdrawal period), the CDSS was retained for azithromycin but withdrawn for the fluoroquinolone. A manual record review was conducted to determine concordance of antibiotic prescription with ARI treatment guidelines.ResultsOf 1131 included ARI visits, 380 (33.6%) were guideline-concordant. For azithromycin, concordance did not change between the pre- and post-withdrawal periods, and adjusted odds of concordance was 8.8 for the full study period, compared to unrestricted antibiotics. For fluoroquinolones, guideline concordance decreased from 88.6% (39 of 44 visits) to 51.3% (59 of 115 visits), pre- vs. post-withdrawal periods (p < 0.005). The adjusted odds of concordance compared to "All Other Antibiotics" visits decreased from 24.4 (95% CI 9.0-66.3) pre-withdrawal to 5.5 (95% CI 3.5-8.8) post-withdrawal (p = .008). Concordance did not change between those same time periods for antibiotics that were never subjected to the intervention ("All Other Antibiotics").ConclusionsA CDSS interposed at the time of e-prescription of selected antibiotics can shift their use toward ARI treatment guidelines, and this effect can be maintained over the long term as long as the CDSS remains in place. Removal of the CDSS after 3.5 years of implementation resulted in a rise in guideline-discordant antibiotic use.

Project description:BackgroundClinical decision support (CDS) is a promising tool for reducing antibiotic prescribing for acute respiratory infections (ARIs).ObjectiveTo assess the impact of previously effective CDS on antibiotic-prescribing rates for ARIs when adapted and implemented in diverse primary care settings.DesignCluster randomized clinical trial (RCT) implementing a CDS tool designed to guide evidence-based evaluation and treatment of streptococcal pharyngitis and pneumonia.SettingTwo large academic health system primary care networks with a mix of providers.ParticipantsAll primary care practices within each health system were invited. All providers within participating clinic were considered a participant. Practices were randomized selection to a control or intervention group.InterventionsIntervention practice providers had access to an integrated clinical prediction rule (iCPR) system designed to determine the risk of bacterial infection from reason for visit of sore throat, cough, or upper respiratory infection and guide evidence-based evaluation and treatment.Main outcome(s)Change in overall antibiotic prescription rates.Measure(s)Frequency, rates, and type of antibiotics prescribed in intervention and controls groups.Results33 primary care practices participated with 541 providers and 100,573 patient visits. Intervention providers completed the tool in 6.9% of eligible visits. Antibiotics were prescribed in 35% and 36% of intervention and control visits, respectively, showing no statistically significant difference. There were also no differences in rates of orders for rapid streptococcal tests (RR, 0.94; P = 0.11) or chest X-rays (RR, 1.01; P = 0.999) between groups.ConclusionsThe iCPR tool was not effective in reducing antibiotic prescription rates for upper respiratory infections in diverse primary care settings. This has implications for the generalizability of CDS tools as they are adapted to heterogeneous clinical contexts.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov (NCT02534987). Registered August 26, 2015 at https://clinicaltrials.gov.

Project description:BackgroundThere has been a notable decrease in antibiotic prescribing in the last thirty years in Sweden. Little is known about factors influencing antibiotic prescribing over several years.ObjectiveTo compare primary care physicians who, over time, reduced their antibiotic prescribing for respiratory tract infections with those who remained either high or low prescribers regarding potentially influencing factors.Design and settingA register-based study including all RTI visits in primary care in Region Kronoberg, Sweden 2006-2014. The data were divided into three 3-year periods.SubjectsThe data comprised all physicians who had diagnosed at least one RTI for each of the three-year periods. The antibiotic prescribing rate adjusted for the patients' sex and age group was calculated for each physician and period, and based on the change between the first and the third period, the physicians were divided into three prescriber groups: The High Prescribing Group, the Decreasing Prescribing Group, and the Low Prescribing Group.Main outcome measuresFor the three prescriber groups, we compared factors influencing antibiotic prescribing such as the characteristics of the physicians, their use of point-of-care tests, their choice of diagnoses, and whether the patients returned and received antibiotics.ResultsThe High Prescribing Group ordered more point-of-care tests, registered more potential bacterial diagnoses, prescribed antibiotics at lower C-reactive protein levels, and prescribed antibiotics more often despite negative group A Streptococci test than in the Low Prescribing Group. The Decreasing Prescribing Group was between the High Prescribing Group and the Low Prescribing Group regarding these variables. The lower prescription rate in the Low Prescribing Group did not result in more return visits or new antibiotic prescriptions within 30 days.ConclusionPoint-of-care testing and its interpretation differed between the prescriber groups. Focus on interpreting point-of-care test results could be a way forward in antibiotic stewardship.

Project description:ObjectivesTo evaluate the effectiveness and safety at population scale of electronically delivered prescribing feedback and decision support interventions at reducing antibiotic prescribing for self limiting respiratory tract infections.DesignOpen label, two arm, cluster randomised controlled trial.SettingUK general practices in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink, randomised between 11 November 2015 and 9 August 2016, with final follow-up on 9 August 2017.Participants79 general practices (582 675 patient years) randomised (1:1) to antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) intervention or usual care.InterventionsAMS intervention comprised a brief training webinar, automated monthly feedback reports of antibiotic prescribing, and electronic decision support tools to inform appropriate prescribing over 12 months. Intervention components were delivered electronically, supported by a local practice champion nominated for the trial.Main outcome measuresPrimary outcome was the rate of antibiotic prescriptions for respiratory tract infections from electronic health records. Serious bacterial complications were evaluated for safety. Analysis was by Poisson regression with general practice as a random effect, adjusting for covariates. Prespecified subgroup analyses by age group were reported.ResultsThe trial included 41 AMS practices (323 155 patient years) and 38 usual care practices (259 520 patient years). Unadjusted and adjusted rate ratios for antibiotic prescribing were 0.89 (95% confidence interval 0.68 to 1.16) and 0.88 (0.78 to 0.99, P=0.04), respectively, with prescribing rates of 98.7 per 1000 patient years for AMS (31 907 prescriptions) and 107.6 per 1000 patient years for usual care (27 923 prescriptions). Antibiotic prescribing was reduced most in adults aged 15-84 years (adjusted rate ratio 0.84, 95% confidence interval 0.75 to 0.95), with one antibiotic prescription per year avoided for every 62 patients (95% confidence interval 40 to 200). There was no evidence of effect for children younger than 15 years (adjusted rate ratio 0.96, 95% confidence interval 0.82 to 1.12) or people aged 85 years and older (0.97, 0.79 to 1.18); there was also no evidence of an increase in serious bacterial complications (0.92, 0.74 to 1.13).ConclusionsElectronically delivered interventions, integrated into practice workflow, result in moderate reductions of antibiotic prescribing for respiratory tract infections in adults, which are likely to be of importance for public health. Antibiotic prescribing to very young or old patients requires further evaluation.Trial registrationISRCTN95232781.

Project description:ObjectiveTo estimate the effectiveness of different strategies involving delayed antibiotic prescription for acute respiratory tract infections.DesignOpen, pragmatic, parallel group, factorial, randomised controlled trial.SettingPrimary care in the United Kingdom.Patients889 patients aged 3 years and over with acute respiratory tract infection, recruited between 3 March 2010 and 28 March 2012 by 53 health professionals in 25 practices.InterventionsPatients judged not to need immediate antibiotics were randomised to undergo four strategies of delayed prescription: recontact for a prescription, post-dated prescription, collection of the prescription, and be given the prescription (patient led). During the trial, a strategy of no antibiotic prescription was added as another randomised comparison. Analysis was intention to treat.Main outcome measuresMean symptom severity (0-6 scale) at days 2-4 (primary outcome), antibiotic use, and patients' beliefs in the effectiveness of antibiotic use. Secondary analysis included comparison with immediate use of antibiotics.ResultsMean symptom severity had minimal differences between the strategies involving no prescription and delayed prescription (recontact, post-date, collection, patient led; 1.62, 1.60, 1.82, 1.68, 1.75, respectively; likelihood ratio test χ(2) 2.61, P=0.625). Duration of symptoms rated moderately bad or worse also did not differ between no prescription and delayed prescription strategies combined (median 3 days v 4 days; 4.29, P=0.368). There were modest and non-significant differences in patients very satisfied with the consultation between the randomised groups (79%, 74%, 80%, 88%, 89%, respectively; likelihood ratio test χ(2) 2.38, P=0.667), belief in antibiotics (71%, 74%, 73%, 72%, 66%; 1.62, P=0.805), or antibiotic use (26%, 37%, 37%, 33%, 39%; 4.96, P=0.292). By contrast, most patients given immediate antibiotics used antibiotics (97%) and strongly believed in them (93%), but with no benefit for symptom severity (score 1.76) or duration (median 4 days).ConclusionStrategies of no prescription or delayed antibiotic prescription result in fewer than 40% of patients using antibiotics, and are associated with less strong beliefs in antibiotics, and similar symptomatic outcomes to immediate prescription. If clear advice is given to patients, there is probably little to choose between the different strategies of delayed prescription.Trial registrationISRCTN38551726.

Project description:Importance:Acute respiratory infections (ARIs) are the syndrome for which antibiotics are most commonly prescribed; viruses for which antibiotics are ineffective cause most ARIs. Objectives:To characterize antibiotic prescribing among outpatients with ARI during influenza season and to identify targets for reducing inappropriate antibiotic prescribing for common ARI diagnoses, including among outpatients with laboratory-confirmed influenza. Design, Setting, and Participants:Cohort study enrolling outpatients aged 6 months or older with ARI evaluated at outpatient clinics associated with 5 US Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network sites during the 2013-2014 and 2014-2015 influenza seasons. All patients received influenza testing by real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction for research purposes only. Antibiotic prescriptions, medical history, and International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision diagnosis codes were collected from medical and pharmacy records, as were group A streptococcal (GAS) testing results in a patient subset. Exposure:Visit for ARI, defined by a new cough of 7 days' duration or less. Main Outcomes and Measures:Antibiotic prescription within 7 days of enrollment. Appropriateness of antibiotic prescribing was based on diagnosis codes, clinical information, and influenza and GAS testing results. Results:Of 14?987 patients with ARI (mean [SD] age, 32 [24] years; 8638 [58%] women; 11?892 [80%] white), 6136 (41%) were prescribed an antibiotic. Among these 6136 patients, 2522 (41%) had diagnoses for which antibiotics are not indicated; 2106 (84%) of these patients were diagnosed as having a viral upper respiratory tract infection or bronchitis (acute or not otherwise specified). Among the 3306 patients (22%) not diagnosed as having pneumonia and who had laboratory-confirmed influenza, 945 (29%) were prescribed an antibiotic, accounting for 17% of all antibiotic prescriptions among patients with nonpneumonia ARI. Among 1248 patients with pharyngitis, 1137 (91%) had GAS testing; 440 of the 1248 patients (35%) were prescribed antibiotics, among whom 168 (38%) had negative results on GAS testing. Of 1200 patients with sinusitis and no other indication for antibiotic treatment who received an antibiotic, 454 (38%) had symptoms for 3 days or less prior to the outpatient visit, suggesting acute viral sinusitis not requiring antibiotics. Conclusions and Relevance:Antibiotic overuse remains widespread in the treatment of outpatient ARIs, including among patients with laboratory-confirmed influenza, although study sites may not be representative of other outpatient settings. Identified targets for improved outpatient antibiotic stewardship include eliminating antibiotic treatment of viral upper respiratory tract infections and bronchitis and improving adherence to prescribing guidelines for pharyngitis and sinusitis. Increased access to sensitive and timely virus diagnostic tests, particularly for influenza, may reduce unnecessary antibiotic use for these syndromes.

Project description:BackgroundAcute respiratory infections are the most common symptomatic reason for seeking care among patients in the US, and account for the majority of all antibiotic prescribing, yet a large fraction of antibiotic prescriptions are inappropriate.ObjectiveWe sought to identify the underlying factors driving variation in antibiotic prescribing across clinicians and settings.Design, participantsUsing electronic health data for adult ambulatory visits for acute respiratory infections to a retail clinic chain and primary care practices from an integrated healthcare system, we identified a random sample of clinicians for survey.Main measuresWe evaluated independent predictors of overall prescribing and imperfect antibiotic prescribing, controlling for clinician and site of care. We defined imperfect antibiotic prescribing as prescribing for non-antibiotic-appropriate diagnoses, failure to prescribe for an antibiotic-appropriate diagnosis, or prescribing a non-guideline-concordant antibiotic.Key resultsResponse rates were 34 % for retail clinics and 24 % for physicians' offices (N = 187). Clinicians in physicians' offices prescribed antibiotics less often than those in retail clinics (53 % versus 67 %; p < 0.01), but had a higher imperfect antibiotic prescribing rate (65 % versus 31 %; p < 0.01). Feeling rushed was associated with higher antibiotic prescribing (OR 1.34; 95 % CI 1.03, 1.75). Antibiotic prescribing was also associated with clinician disagreement that antibiotics are overused (OR 1.60, 95 % CI, 1.16, 2.20). Imperfect antibiotic prescribing was associated with receiving antibiotic prescribing feedback (OR 1.35, 95 % CI 1.04, 1.75) and disagreement that patient demand was a problem (OR 1.66, 95 % CI 1.00, 2.73). Imperfect antibiotic prescribing was less common with clinicians who perceived that they prescribed antibiotics less often than their peers (OR 0.63, 95 % CI 0.46, 0.87).ConclusionsPoor-quality antibiotic prescribing was associated with feeling rushed, believing less strongly that antibiotics were overused, and believing that patient demand was not an issue, factors that can be assessed and addressed in future interventions.

Project description:ObjectivesInappropriate antibiotic use for respiratory tract infection (RTI) is an ongoing problem linked to the emergence of drug resistance and other adverse effects. Less is known about the prescribing practices of individual physicians or the impact of physician prescribing habits on patient outcomes. We studied the prescribing practices of providers for acute RTIs in an integrated health system, identified patient factors associated with receipt of an antibiotic and assessed the relation between providers' adjusted prescribing rates and a number of patient outcomes.MethodsThis was a retrospective analysis of adults with an RTI visit to any primary care providers across the Cleveland Clinic Health System in 2011-2012. Patients with a history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or immunocompromised status were excluded. Logistic regression was used to examine patient factors associated with receipt of an antibiotic.ResultsOf 31,416 patients with an RTI, 54.8% received an antibiotic. Patient factors associated with antibiotic prescribing included white race (odds ratio [OR] 1.35, P < 0.001), presence of fever (OR 1.66, P < 0.001), and a diagnosis of bronchitis (OR 10.98, P < 0.001) or sinusitis (OR 33.85, P < 0.001). Among 290 providers with ≥10 RTI visits, adjusted antibiotic prescribing rates ranged from 0% to 100% (mean 49%). Antibiotics were prescribed more often for sinusitis (OR 33.85, P < 0.001), bronchitis (OR 10.98, P < 0.001), or pharyngitis (OR 1.76, P < 0.001) compared with upper respiratory tract infection. Patients who were prescribed antibiotics at the index visit were more likely to return for RTI within 1 year (adjusted OR 1.26, P < 0.001). Emergency department visits for respiratory complications were rare and not associated with antibiotic receipt.ConclusionsAntibiotic prescribing for RTI varies widely among physicians and cannot be explained by patient factors. Patients prescribed antibiotics for RTI were more likely to return for RTI.

Dataset Information

Impact of a clinical decision support system on antibiotic prescribing for acute respiratory infections in primary care: quasi-experimental trial.

Objective

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Impact of a clinical decision support system on antibiotic prescribing for acute respiratory infections in primary care: quasi-experimental trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets