Dataset Information

Decision support during electronic prescription to stem antibiotic overuse for acute respiratory infections: a long-term, quasi-experimental study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Interventions 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.

Methods

This 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 From 05/2006 to 12/2011 (post-withdrawal period), the CDSS was retained for azithromycin but withdrawn for the fluoroquinolone.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.

Results

Of 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").

Conclusions

A 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.

SUBMITTER: Gifford J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5537944 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

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:BACKGROUND:Antibiotic use is a major driver of antibiotic resistance. Although delayed antibiotic prescription is a recommended strategy to reduce antibiotic use, practices vary; it appears less commonly used in southern European countries where antibiotic consumption is highest. Despite these variations, few qualitative studies have explored general practitioners' perceptions of delayed antibiotic prescription. We therefore aimed to explore and describe the perceptions of delayed antibiotic prescription for respiratory tract infections among general practitioners in Malta. METHODS:This qualitative phenomenographic study was conducted in Malta. A semi-structured interview guide was developed in English, pilot tested and revised accordingly. Interview topics included views on antibiotic resistance, antibiotic use and delayed antibiotic prescription for respiratory tract infections, and barriers and facilitators to antibiotic prescription. Individual, face-to-face interviews were held in 2014 with a quota sample of 20 general practitioners and transcribed verbatim. Data were subsequently analysed using a phenomenographic approach. FINDINGS:General practitioners perceived delayed antibiotic prescription in five qualitatively different ways: (A) "The Service Provider"-maintaining a good general practitioner-patient relationship to retain patients and avoid doctor-shopping, (B) "The Uncertainty Avoider"-reaching a compromise and providing treatment just in case, (C) "The Comforter"-providing the patient comfort and reassurance, (D) "The Conscientious Practitioner"-empowering and educating patients, and limiting antibiotic use, and (E) "The Holder of Professional Power"-retaining general practitioner responsibility by employing a wait-and-see approach. Although general practitioners were largely positive towards delayed antibiotic prescription, not all supported the strategy; some preferred a wait-and-see approach with follow-up. Many delayed antibiotic prescription users selectively practiced delayed prescription with patients they trusted or who they believed had a certain level of knowledge and understanding. They also preferred a patient-led approach with a one to three day delay; post-dating delayed antibiotic prescriptions was uncommon. CONCLUSIONS:In this study we have shown that general practitioners hold varying perceptions about delayed antibiotic prescription and that there is variation in the way delayed antibiotic prescription is employed in Malta. Whilst delayed antibiotic prescription is utilised in Malta, not all general practitioners support the strategy, and motivations and practices differ. In high consumption settings, formal and standardised implementation of delayed antibiotic prescription could help curb antibiotic overuse. Diagnosis-specific delayed antibiotic prescription recommendations should also be incorporated into guidelines. Finally, further investigation into patients' and pharmacists' views on delayed antibiotic prescription is required. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:NCT03218930.

Project description:BackgroundAntibiotic resistance is a major health threat. Inappropriate antibiotic use has been shown to be an important determinant of the emergence of antibiotic resistance. Decision support systems for antimicrobial management can support clinicians to optimize antibiotic prescription.ObjectiveThe aim of this systematic review is to identify factors influencing the implementation of decision support systems for antibiotic prescription in hospitals.MethodsA systematic search of factors impeding or facilitating successful implementation of decision support systems for antibiotic prescription was performed in January 2022 in the databases PubMed, Web of Science and The Cochrane Library. Only studies were included which comprised decision support systems in hospitals for prescribing antibiotic therapy, published in English with a qualitative, quantitative or mixed-methods study design and between 2011 and 2021. Factors influencing the implementation were identified through text analysis by two reviewers.ResultsA total of 14 publications were identified matching the inclusion criteria. The majority of factors relate to technological and organizational aspects of decision support system implementation. Some factors include the integration of the decision support systems into existing systems, system design, consideration of potential end-users as well as training and support for end-users. In addition, user-related factors, like user attitude towards the system, computer literacy and prior experience with the system seem to be important for successful implementation of decision support systems for antibiotic prescription in hospitals.ConclusionThe results indicate a broad spectrum of factors of decision support system implementation for antibiotic prescription and contributes to the literature by identifying important organizational as well as user-related factors. Wider organizational dimensions as well as the interaction between user and technology appear important for supporting implementation.