Delayed antibiotic prescriptions for respiratory infections.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Spurling GK
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6372405 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:ObjectiveTo assess the overall effect of delayed antibiotic prescribing on average symptom severity for patients with respiratory tract infections in the community, and to identify any factors modifying this effect.DesignSystematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis.Data sourcesCochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase, EBSCO CINAHL Plus, and Web of Science.Eligibility criteria for study selectionRandomised controlled trials and observational cohort studies in a community setting that allowed comparison between delayed versus no antibiotic prescribing, and delayed versus immediate antibiotic prescribing.Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was the average symptom severity two to four days after the initial consultation measured on a seven item scale (ranging from normal to as bad as could be). Secondary outcomes were duration of illness after the initial consultation, complications resulting in admission to hospital or death, reconsultation with the same or worsening illness, and patient satisfaction rated on a Likert scale.ResultsData were obtained from nine randomised controlled trials and four observational studies, totalling 55 682 patients. No difference was found in follow-up symptom severity (seven point scale) for delayed versus immediate antibiotics (adjusted mean difference -0.003, 95% confidence interval -0.12 to 0.11) or delayed versus no antibiotics (0.02, -0.11 to 0.15). Symptom duration was slightly longer in those given delayed versus immediate antibiotics (11.4 v 10.9 days), but was similar for delayed versus no antibiotics. Complications resulting in hospital admission or death were lower with delayed versus no antibiotics (odds ratio 0.62, 95% confidence interval 0.30 to 1.27) and delayed versus immediate antibiotics (0.78, 0.53 to 1.13). A significant reduction in reconsultation rates (odds ratio 0.72, 95% confidence interval 0.60 to 0.87) and an increase in patient satisfaction (adjusted mean difference 0.09, 0.06 to 0.11) were observed in delayed versus no antibiotics. The effect of delayed versus immediate antibiotics and delayed versus no antibiotics was not modified by previous duration of illness, fever, comorbidity, or severity of symptoms. Children younger than 5 years had a slightly higher follow-up symptom severity with delayed antibiotics than with immediate antibiotics (adjusted mean difference 0.10, 95% confidence interval 0.03 to 0.18), but no increased severity was found in the older age group.ConclusionsDelayed antibiotic prescribing is a safe and effective strategy for most patients, including those in higher risk subgroups. Delayed prescribing was associated with similar symptom duration as no antibiotic prescribing and is unlikely to lead to poorer symptom control than immediate antibiotic prescribing. Delayed prescribing could reduce reconsultation rates and is unlikely to be associated with an increase in symptoms or illness duration, except in young children.Study registrationPROSPERO CRD42018079400.
| S-EPMC8080136 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundUpper respiratory tract infections (URTIs) account for approximately 50% of antibiotic prescriptions in the United Kingdom. General practitioners (GPs) frequently issue such prescriptions simply because they believe that the patient expects it. Deferred prescribing (issuing a prescription, but with instructions to wait for no spontaneous improvement before deciding whether to use it) might address patients' expectations, while minimising actual antibiotic consumption. Although the technique is quite widely practiced, patients' attitudes and responses to it are unclear.AimsTo establish the proportion of recipients who claim to consume their delayed antibiotic prescriptions. To elicit factors associated with patients' decisions to consume their antibiotics, and patients' confidence in taking this decision.Design of studyPostal questionnaire survey.SettingPatients from 13 group practices in the south of England.MethodsPatients who had received a delayed antibiotic prescription for URTI from their GP were posted a questionnaire 2 days after their consultation.ResultsThree hundred and seventy-four subjects were recruited of whom 256 (68.4%) returned their questionnaires. Just over half (53.1%) of the responders claimed to have consumed their antibiotics. The majority of patients (87.1%) were confident about taking the decision as to whether to use their antibiotics, and 92.5% would choose to receive a delayed prescription again. Subjects were more likely to take their antibiotics if their presenting symptoms included a fever or sinus pain.ConclusionMost patients are confident in making the decision about whether or not to take their antibiotics when receiving a delayed prescription for URTIs. Antibiotic consumption is associated with presenting symptoms, and this has implications for future practice.
| S-EPMC1314726 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThis study aimed to evaluate the clinical safety of delayed antibiotic prescribing for upper respiratory tract infections (URTIs), which is recommended in treatment guidelines for less severe cases.MethodsTwo population-based cohort studies used the English Clinical Practice Research Databank and Welsh Secure Anonymized Information Linkage, containing electronic health records from primary care linked to hospital admission records. Patients with URTI and prescriptions of amoxicillin, clarithromycin, doxycycline, erythromycin, or phenoxymethylpenicillin were identified. Patients were stratified according to delayed and immediate prescribing relative to URTI diagnosis. Outcome of interest was infection-related hospital admission after 30 days.ResultsThe population included 1.82 million patients with an URTI and antibiotic prescription; 91.7% had an antibiotic at URTI diagnosis date (immediate) and 8.3% had URTI diagnosis in 1-30 days before (delayed). Delayed antibiotic prescribing was associated with a 52% increased risk of infection-related hospital admissions (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.52; 95% confidence interval, 1.43-1.62). The probability of delayed antibiotic prescribing was unrelated to predicted risks of hospital admission. Analyses of the number needed to harm showed considerable variability across different patient groups (median with delayed antibiotic prescribing, 1357; 2.5% percentile, 295; 97.5% percentile, 3366).ConclusionsThis is the first large population-based study examining the safety of delayed antibiotic prescribing. Waiting to treat URTI was associated with increased risk of hospital admission, although delayed antibiotic prescribing was used similarly between high- and low-risk patients. There is a need to better target delayed antibiotic prescribing to URTI patients with lower risks of complications.
| S-EPMC8282258 | biostudies-literature
Project description:INTRODUCTION:Urinary tract infections (UTI) are a common indication for antibiotic use in the emergency department (ED). With antibiotic resistance on the rise, it is essential that antibiotics be prescribed appropriately for UTIs. Our objective was to evaluate the appropriateness of antibiotic prescriptions by ED providers for uncomplicated cystitis and pyelonephritis. METHODS:We conducted a retrospective study of females ages 2-50 years seen in an academic ED from January 2017 to April 2018 diagnosed with UTI. We assessed the appropriateness of discharge antibiotic prescriptions, as determined by adherence to clinical practice guidelines, best evidence for the particular indication (cystitis vs pyelonephritis for children and adults), and the local antibiogram. RESULTS:A total of 421 patients were included in this study. Of these, 60 children and 198 adults were diagnosed with cystitis, and 47 children and 116 adults were diagnosed with pyelonephritis. Treatment in the absence of true infection was common, with culture-confirmed UTI occurring in only 17/50 (34%) of children and 60/129 (47%) of adults diagnosed with cystitis, and 23/40 (58%) of children and 58/87 (67%) of adults diagnosed with pyelonephritis, among patients who had urine cultures. The type of antibiotic prescribed was appropriate in 53/60 (88%) of children and 135/198 (68%) of adults with cystitis, and 38/47 (81%) of children and 53/116 (46%) of adults with pyelonephritis. The most common inappropriate antibiotic types were beta-lactams in adults (n = 92), nitrofurantoin for pyelonephritis (n = 16), and amoxicillin (n = 15). Dosing and duration errors were also common, occurring in 122/279 (44%) of prescriptions of an appropriate antibiotic type. The frequency of errors in the type of antibiotic prescribed was similar among provider types (attending physician, resident physician, and advanced practice clinician; p = 0.926). CONCLUSION:This study reveals room for improvement in antibiotic prescription practices across provider cohorts in the ED for the management of uncomplicated cystitis and pyelonephritis in females.
| S-EPMC7234695 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionAlthough bacterial co- and superinfections are rarely present in patients with COVID-19, overall antibiotic prescribing in admitted patients is high. In order to counter antibiotic overprescribing, antibiotic stewardship teams need reliable data concerning antibiotic prescribing in admitted patients with COVID-19.MethodsIn this prospective observational cohort study, we performed a quantitative and qualitative evaluation of antibiotic prescriptions in patients admitted to the COVID-19 ward of a 721-bed Belgian university hospital between 1 May and 2 November 2020. Data on demographics, clinical and microbiological parameters and antibiotic consumption were collected. Defined daily doses (DDD) were calculated for antibiotics prescribed in the context of a (presumed) bacterial respiratory tract infection and converted into two indicators: DDD/admission and DDD/100 hospital bed days. A team of infectious disease specialists performed an appropriateness evaluation for every prescription. A driver analysis was performed to identify factors increasing the odds of an antibiotic prescription in patients with a confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis.ResultsOf 403 eligible participants with a suspected COVID-19 infection, 281 were included. In 13.8% of the 203 admissions with a COVID-19 confirmed diagnosis, antibiotics were initiated for a (presumed) bacterial respiratory tract co-/superinfection (0.86 DDD/admission; 8.92 DDD/100 bed days; 39.4% were scored as 'appropriate'). Five drivers of antibiotic prescribing were identified: history of cerebrovascular disease, high neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio in male patients, age, elevated ferritin levels and the collection of respiratory samples for bacteriological analysis.ConclusionIn the studied population, the antibiotic consumption for a (presumed) bacterial respiratory tract co-/superinfection was low. In particular, the small total number of DDDs in patients with confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis suggests thoughtful antibiotic use. However, antibiotic stewardship programmes remain crucial to counter unnecessary and inappropriate antibiotic use in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.Trial registrationThe study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04544072).
| S-EPMC8444524 | biostudies-literature
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.
| S-EPMC6874332 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAntibiotics are overprescribed for respiratory tract infections (RTIs). However, the decision to prescribe is often complex. Delayed antibiotic prescription (DAP), a strategy designed to promote more rational antibiotic use, is still not widely used. The aim of this study was to explore perceptions and attitudes in primary care professionals, regarding antibiotic use and different DAP strategies for uncomplicated RTIs.MethodsWe conducted a qualitative study, using an inductive thematic approach to generate themes, based on focus group discussions and semi-structured interviews with professionals, recruited from 6 primary care centres (Barcelona metropolitan area, Spain).Results26 professionals (25 family physicians and one nurse) were included in four focus group discussions and three semi-structured interviews. Participants commented that RTIs were a main reason for consultation, motivated often by patient anxiety and fear of possible complications, and this was associated with the patients' poor health-related education. Acknowledging inappropriate antibiotic use in the health system, participants attributed this, mainly to defensive medicine strategies. DAP was used when in doubt about the aetiology, and considering factors related to patient-physician interactions. The main perceived advantage of DAP was that it could reduce the need for additional visits, while the main disadvantage was uncertainty regarding proper use by the patient.ConclusionsDAP was used by participants in cases of doubt, in specific situations, and for specific patient profiles. Weak points were detected in our primary care system and its users that affect the proper use of both antibiotics and DAP, namely, time pressure on professionals, poor patient health-related education, and the lack of a patient-physician relationship in some scenarios.
| S-EPMC10548630 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAntibiotics prescribed for acute respiratory tract infections in the telemedicine setting are often unwarranted.ObjectiveWe hypothesized that education plus individualized feedback, compared with education alone, would significantly reduce antibiotic prescription rates for upper respiratory infections, bronchitis, sinusitis, and pharyngitis in a telemedicine setting.DesignTwo-arm, parallel-group randomized controlled trial conducted at a telemedicine practice from January 1, 2018, to November 30, 2018.ParticipantsClinicians employed at the practice on or after January 1, 2017 (n = 45).InterventionsThe control group received education (treatment guideline presentation and online course) in April 2018. The intervention group received education plus individualized feedback via an online dashboard with monthly rates of personal and practice-wide antibiotic prescription rates starting May 2018.Main measuresAntibiotic prescription for any visit with at least one target condition: upper respiratory tract infection, bronchitis, sinusitis, and pharyngitis.Key resultsBaseline antibiotic prescription rates in control and intervention groups across conditions were as follows: upper respiratory infection (URI): 626/3410 (18.4%), 413/2752 (15.0%), bronchitis: 689/1471 (46.8%), 742/1162 (64.0%), sinusitis: 5154/6131 (84.1%), 4250/4876 (87.2%), pharyngitis: 2308/2838 (81.3%), 1593/2126 (74.9%). Antibiotic prescriptions for all conditions decreased in the post-intervention period compared with those in the pre-intervention period, for both control and intervention groups. Reduction of antibiotic prescriptions for URI and bronchitis was greater for the group receiving education plus individualized feedback compared with that for the group receiving education alone (interaction term ratio 0.60, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.77 for URI; and interaction term ratio 0.42, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.55 for bronchitis), but not sinusitis and pharyngitis.ConclusionEducation plus individualized feedback in a telemedicine practice significantly decreased antibiotic prescription rates for upper respiratory tract infections and bronchitis, compared with education alone. Future studies should focus on tailoring antibiotic stewardship programs based on underlying conditions, and the maintenance of early reductions in antibiotic prescription.
| S-EPMC7878643 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionDelayed prescribing can be a useful strategy to reduce antibiotic prescribing, but it is not clear for whom delayed prescribing might be effective. This protocol outlines an individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational cohort studies to explore the overall effect of delayed prescribing and identify key patient characteristics that are associated with efficacy of delayed prescribing.Methods and analysisA systematic search of the databases Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, EBSCO CINAHL Plus and Web of Science was conducted to identify relevant studies from inception to October 2017. Outcomes of interest include duration of illness, severity of illness, complication, reconsultation and patient satisfaction. Study authors of eligible papers will be contacted and invited to contribute raw IPD data. IPD data will be checked against published data, harmonised and aggregated to create one large IPD database. Multilevel regression will be performed to explore interaction effects between treatment allocation and patient characteristics. The economic evaluation will be conducted based on IPD from the combined trial and observational studies to estimate the differences in costs and effectiveness for delayed prescribing compared with normal practice. A decision model will be developed to assess potential savings and cost-effectiveness in terms of reduced antibiotic usage of delayed prescribing and quality-adjusted life years.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval was obtained from the University of Southampton Faculty of Medicine Research Ethics Committee (Reference number: 30068). Findings of this study will be published in peer-reviewed academic journals as well as General Practice trade journals and will be presented at national and international conferences. The results will have important public health implications, shaping the way in which antibiotics are prescribed in the future and to whom delayed prescriptions are issued.Prospero registration numberCRD42018079400.
| S-EPMC6347865 | biostudies-literature
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.
| S-EPMC3944682 | biostudies-literature