Dataset Information

Implementing interventions to reduce antibiotic use: a qualitative study in high-prescribing practices.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Trials have shown that delayed antibiotic prescriptions (DPs) and point-of-care C-Reactive Protein testing (POC-CRPT) are effective in reducing antibiotic use in general practice, but these were not typically implemented in high-prescribing practices. We aimed to explore views of professionals from high-prescribing practices about uptake and implementation of DPs and POC-CRPT to reduce antibiotic use.

Methods

This was a qualitative focus group study in English general practices. The highest antibiotic prescribing practices in the West Midlands were invited to participate. Clinical and non-clinical professionals attended focus groups co-facilitated by two researchers. Focus groups were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically.

Results

Nine practices (50 professionals) participated. Four main themes were identified. Compatibility of strategies with clinical roles and experience - participants viewed the strategies as having limited value as 'clinical tools', perceiving them as useful only in 'rare' instances of clinical uncertainty and/or for those less experienced. Strategies as 'social tools' - participants perceived the strategies as helpful for negotiating treatment decisions and educating patients, particularly those expecting antibiotics. Ambiguities - participants perceived ambiguities around when they should be used, and about their impact on antibiotic use. Influence of context - various other situational and practical issues were raised with implementing the strategies.

Conclusions

High-prescribing practices do not view DPs and POC-CRPT as sufficiently useful 'clinical tools' in a way which corresponds to the current policy approach advocating their use to reduce clinical uncertainty and improve antimicrobial stewardship. Instead, policy attention should focus on how these strategies may instead be used as 'social tools' to reduce unnecessary antibiotic use. Attention should also focus on the many ambiguities (concerns and questions) about, and contextual barriers to, using these strategies that need addressing to support wider and more consistent implementation.

SUBMITTER: Borek AJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7825381 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundClinicians frequently prescribe antibiotics inappropriately for acute respiratory infections (ARIs). Our objective was to test information technology-enabled behavioral interventions to reduce inappropriate antibiotic prescribing for ARIs in a randomized controlled pilot test trial.MethodsPrimary care clinicians were randomized in a 2 × 2 × 2 factorial experiment with 3 interventions: 1) Accountable Justifications; 2) Suggested Alternatives; and 3) Peer Comparison. Beforehand, participants completed an educational module. Measures included: rates of antibiotic prescribing for: non-antibiotic-appropriate ARI diagnoses, acute sinusitis/pharyngitis, all other diagnoses/symptoms of respiratory infection, and all three ARI categories combined.ResultsWe examined 3,276 visits in the pre-intervention year and 3,099 in the intervention year. The antibiotic prescribing rate fell for non-antibiotic-appropriate ARIs (24.7 % in the pre-intervention year to 5.2 % in the intervention year); sinusitis/pharyngitis (50.3 to 44.7 %); all other diagnoses/symptoms of respiratory infection (40.2 to 25.3 %); and all categories combined (38.7 to 24.2 %; all p < 0.001). There were no significant relationships between any intervention and antibiotic prescribing for non-antibiotic-appropriate ARI diagnoses or sinusitis/pharyngitis. Suggested Alternatives was associated with reduced antibiotic prescribing for other diagnoses or symptoms of respiratory infection (odds ratio [OR], 0.62; 95 % confidence interval [CI], 0.44-0.89) and for all ARI categories combined (OR, 0.72; 95 % CI, 0.54-0.96). Peer Comparison was associated with reduced prescribing for all ARI categories combined (OR, 0.73; 95 % CI, 0.53-0.995).ConclusionsWe observed large reductions in antibiotic prescribing regardless of whether or not study participants received an intervention, suggesting an overriding Hawthorne effect or possibly clinician-to-clinician contamination. Low baseline inappropriate prescribing may have led to floor effects.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01454960 .

Project description:ImportanceInterventions based on behavioral science might reduce inappropriate antibiotic prescribing.ObjectiveTo assess effects of behavioral interventions and rates of inappropriate (not guideline-concordant) antibiotic prescribing during ambulatory visits for acute respiratory tract infections.Design, setting, and participantsCluster randomized clinical trial conducted among 47 primary care practices in Boston and Los Angeles. Participants were 248 enrolled clinicians randomized to receive 0, 1, 2, or 3 interventions for 18 months. All clinicians received education on antibiotic prescribing guidelines on enrollment. Interventions began between November 1, 2011, and October 1, 2012. Follow-up for the latest-starting sites ended on April 1, 2014. Adult patients with comorbidities and concomitant infections were excluded.InterventionsThree behavioral interventions, implemented alone or in combination: suggested alternatives presented electronic order sets suggesting nonantibiotic treatments; accountable justification prompted clinicians to enter free-text justifications for prescribing antibiotics into patients' electronic health records; peer comparison sent emails to clinicians that compared their antibiotic prescribing rates with those of "top performers" (those with the lowest inappropriate prescribing rates).Main outcomes and measuresAntibiotic prescribing rates for visits with antibiotic-inappropriate diagnoses (nonspecific upper respiratory tract infections, acute bronchitis, and influenza) from 18 months preintervention to 18 months afterward, adjusting each intervention's effects for co-occurring interventions and preintervention trends, with random effects for practices and clinicians.ResultsThere were 14,753 visits (mean patient age, 47 years; 69% women) for antibiotic-inappropriate acute respiratory tract infections during the baseline period and 16,959 visits (mean patient age, 48 years; 67% women) during the intervention period. Mean antibiotic prescribing rates decreased from 24.1% at intervention start to 13.1% at intervention month 18 (absolute difference, -11.0%) for control practices; from 22.1% to 6.1% (absolute difference, -16.0%) for suggested alternatives (difference in differences, -5.0% [95% CI, -7.8% to 0.1%]; P = .66 for differences in trajectories); from 23.2% to 5.2% (absolute difference, -18.1%) for accountable justification (difference in differences, -7.0% [95% CI, -9.1% to -2.9%]; P < .001); and from 19.9% to 3.7% (absolute difference, -16.3%) for peer comparison (difference in differences, -5.2% [95% CI, -6.9% to -1.6%]; P < .001). There were no statistically significant interactions (neither synergy nor interference) between interventions.Conclusions and relevanceAmong primary care practices, the use of accountable justification and peer comparison as behavioral interventions resulted in lower rates of inappropriate antibiotic prescribing for acute respiratory tract infections.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01454947.

Project description:ObjectiveThe indiscriminate prescription of antibiotics has led to the emergence of resistance microbes worldwide. This study aimed to investigate the antibiotic prescribing practices amongst general dental practitioners and specialists in managing endodontic infections in the United Arab Emirates (UAE).DesignGeneral dental practitioners and specialists in the UAE were invited to participate in an online questionnaire survey which included questions on socio-demographics, practitioner's antibiotic prescribing preferences for various pulpal and periapical diseases, and their choice, in terms of the type, dose and duration of the antibiotic. The link to the survey questionnaire was sent to 250 invited dentists. Data were analyzed by descriptive statistics and chi-square tests for independence and level of significance was set at 0.05.ResultsA total of 174 respondents participated in the survey (response rate = 70%). The respondents who prescribed antibiotics at least once a month were 38.5% while 17.2% did so, more than three times a week; amoxicillin 500 mg was the antibiotic of choice for patients not allergic to penicillin (43.7%), and in cases of penicillin allergies, erythromycin 500 mg (21.3%). There was a significant difference in the antibiotic prescribing practices of GDPs compared to endodontists and other specialties especially in clinical cases such as acute apical abscesses with swelling and moderate to severe pre-operative symptoms and retreatment of endodontic cases (p<0.05). Approximately, three quarters of the respondents (78.7%) did not prescribe a loading dose when prescribing antibiotics. About 15% respondents prescribed antibiotics to their patients if they were not accessible to patients due to a holiday/weekend.ConclusionsIn general, the antibiotic prescribing practices of UAE dentists are congruent with the international norms. However, there were occasions of inappropriate prescriptions such as in patients with irreversible pulpitis, necrotic pulps with no systemic involvement and/or with sinus tracts.

Project description:BackgroundQuality improvement (QI) initiatives are increasingly used to improve the quality of care and reduce prescribing errors. The Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) and Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) QI initiative uses routinely collected electronic primary care data to provide bespoke practice-level reports on prescribing safety. The aim of this study was to explore how the QI reports were used, barriers and facilitators to use, long-term culture change and perceived impact on patient care and practices systems as a result of receiving the reports.MethodsA qualitative study using purposive sampling of practices contributing to the CPRD, semi-structured interviews and inductive thematic analysis. We interviewed general practitioners, pharmacists, practice managers and research nurses.ResultsWe conducted 18 interviews, and organised themes summarising the use of QI reports in practice: receiving the report, facilitators and barriers to acting upon the reports, acting upon the report, and how the reports contribute to a quality culture. Effective dissemination of reports, and a positive attitude to audit and the perceived relevance of the clinical topic facilitated use. Lack of time and failure to see or act upon the reports meant they were not used. Factors influencing use of the reports included the structure of the report, ease of identifying cases, and perceptions about coding accuracy. GPs and pharmacists used the reports to conduct case reviews and directly contact patients to discuss unsafe prescribing and patient medication preferences. Finally, the reports contributed to the development of a quality culture within practices through promoting audit activity and acting as a reminder of good prescribing behaviours, promoting future patient safety initiatives, contributing to continuing professional development and improving local networks.ConclusionsThis study found the reports facilitated individual case review leading to an enhanced sense of quality culture in practices where they were utilised. Our findings demonstrate that the reports were generally considered useful and have been used to support patient safety and clinical practice in specific cases.

Project description:BackgroundUnnecessary antibiotic use is associated with adverse side effects and rising rates of resistance at the individual and population level. This study used a theory-informed approach to identify potentially modifiable determinants of antibiotic prescribing for patients presenting to primary care with upper respiratory tract infection symptoms.MethodsQualitative interviews were conducted with primary care physicians in Ontario, Canada who were identified as medium- or high-volume antibiotic prescribers (high volume defined as top 20th percentile versus "medium" defined as 40th to 60th percentile). The interview guide and analysis were informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework. Each interview was coded by two research team members. Sampling and analysis continued until thematic saturation was achieved.ResultsTwenty family physicians were interviewed. Physicians felt that many decisions about prescribing for upper respiratory tract infection symptoms were straightforward (i.e., black and white). However, intention to avoid prescribing in cases where an antibiotic was not indicated clinically did not always align with the provider action or expectation of the patient. Clinical decisions were influenced by the Theoretical Domain Framework domains that were both internal to the physician (Knowledge, Skills, Social/Professional Role, and Belief about Capabilities) and external to the physician (Social Influence, Belief about Consequences, Reinforcement, Emotions, and Behavioural Regulation). The Environmental Context and Resources played a key role. Physicians reported significant differences in their approach to antibiotic prescribing within episodic (walk-in) or continuity of care settings, as the presence (or not) of longitudinal physician-patient relationships seemed to moderate the role of these factors on the decision-making process in cases of uncertainty.ConclusionsAntibiotic prescribing in primary care is a complex decision-making process in which context may outweigh biology during encounters featuring clinical uncertainty. Differential skill in handling uncertainty and tactics used to operationalize guideline recommendations in the real world seems to contribute to observed variation in prescribing patterns, as much or more than differences in knowledge of best practices.

Project description:ObjectiveTo test associations between several opioid prescribing policy interventions and changes in early (acute/subacute) high-risk opioid prescribing practices.Data sourcesPopulation-based workers' compensation pharmacy billing and claims data, Washington State Department of Labor and Industries (January 2008-June 2015).Study designWe used interrupted time series analysis to test associations between three policy intervention timepoints and monthly proportions of population-based measures of high-risk, low-risk, and any workers' compensation-related opioid prescribing. We also tested associations between the policy intervention timepoints and five high-risk opioid prescribing indicators among workers prescribed any opioids within 3 months after injury: (a) >7 cumulative (not necessarily consecutive) days' supply of opioids during the acute phase, (b) high-dose opioids, (c) concurrent sedatives, (d) chronic opioids, and (e) a composite high-risk opioid prescribing indicator.Principal findingsWithin 3 months after injury, 9 percent of workers were exposed to high-risk and 12 percent to low-risk workers' compensation-related opioid prescribing; 79 percent filled no workers' compensation-related opioid prescription. Among workers prescribed any early (acute/subacute) opioids, the indicator for >7 days' supply of opioids during the acute phase was present for 30 percent, high-dose opioids for 18 percent, concurrent sedatives for 3 percent, and chronic opioids for 2 percent. Beyond a general shift toward more infrequent and lower-risk workers' compensation-related opioid prescribing, each policy intervention timepoint was significantly associated with reductions in specific acute/subacute high-risk opioid prescribing indicators; each of the four specific high-risk opioid prescribing indicators had significant reductions associated with at least one policy.ConclusionsSeveral state-level opioid prescribing policies were significantly associated with safer workers' compensation-related opioid prescribing practices during the first 3 months after injury (acute/subacute phase), which should in turn reduce transition to chronic opioids and associated negative health outcomes.

Project description:BackgroundTask sharing has been used worldwide to improve access to mental health care, where nonspecialist providers-individuals with no formal training in mental health-have been trained to effectively treat perinatal depressive and anxiety symptoms. Little formative research has been conducted to examine relevant barriers and facilitators of nonspecialist providers and the use of telemedicine in treatment service delivery.ObjectiveThe primary objective of this study was to examine the main barriers and facilitators of nonspecialist provider-delivered psychological treatments for perinatal populations with common mental health disorders, such as depression and anxiety, from a multistakeholder perspective.MethodsThis study took place in Toronto, Canada. In total, 33 in-depth interviews were conducted with multiple stakeholder groups (women with lived experience and their significant others, as well as health and mental health professionals). Qualitative data were quantified to estimate commonly endorsed themes within and across stakeholder groups.ResultsPsychological treatments delivered by nonspecialist providers were considered acceptable by the vast majority of participants (30/33, 90%). Across all stakeholder groups, nurses (20/33, 61%) and midwives (14/33, 42%) were the most commonly endorsed cadre of nonspecialist providers. The majority of stakeholders (32/33, 97%) were amenable to nonspecialist providers delivering psychological treatment via telemedicine (27/33, 82%), although concerns were raised about the ability to establish a therapeutic alliance via telemedicine (16/33, 48%). Empathy was the most desired characteristic of a nonspecialist provider (61%). Patient and patient advocate stakeholders were more likely to emphasize stigma as an important barrier to accessing psychological treatments (7/12, 58%), compared to clinicians (2/9, 22%) and spouses (1/5, 20%). Clinician stakeholders were more likely to emphasize the importance of ensuring nonspecialist providers were trained to deliver psychological treatments (3/9, 33%), compared to other stakeholder groups.ConclusionsThese results can inform the design, implementation, and integration of nonspecialist-delivered interventions via telemedicine for women with perinatal depressive and anxiety symptoms in high-income country contexts.

Project description:ContextThe increase and global dissemination of antibiotic resistance limit the use of antibiotics to prevent and treat infections. Implementing antibiotic stewardship programs guided by local data on prescription profiles is a useful strategy to reduce the burden of antibiotic resistance. The aim was to determine the prevalence of antibiotic use and guideline compliance at Luang Prabang provincial hospital, Lao PDR.MethodsA point prevalence survey of antibiotics was conducted among hospitalized patients admitted to Luang Prabang hospital (204 beds) in Lao PDR on May 25, 2023. All patients presenting at 8:00 AM were eligible. Sociodemographic data, indications for antibiotic use, and antibiotic prescriptions were collected from medical records using a paper-based questionnaire and entered into an electronic platform following WHO methodology. The prevalence of antibiotic use was determined.ResultsOut of the 102 patients included, 60(58.8%) were undergoing antibiotic treatment, of which 33(55.0%) received combination therapy, and 7(10.5%) had two indications for antibiotic use. The highest prevalence was in the surgical ward (14/15, 93%) followed by general paediatrics (18/27, 67%). Out of the 100 antibiotic prescriptions, 47(47%) were for community-acquired infections, 26(26%) for surgical prophylaxis, 13(13%) for hospital-acquired infections and 5(5%) for medical prophylaxis. Twenty(20%) antibiotics were prescribed for obstetrics and gynaecology prophylaxis, 17(17%) for intra-abdominal infections, and 10(10.0%) for pneumonia treatment as well as bone, and joint infections. The main antibiotics prescribed were ceftriaxone 36(34.6%), metronidazole 18(17.3%), ampicillin 8(7.7%), and gentamicin 8(7.7%). Only 2(3%) samples were sent to the laboratory, one of which showed a positive culture for Escherichia coli Extended Spectrum β-Lactamase. According to the WHO Access Watch and Reserve classification, 55(52.9%) molecules belonged to the Access category, 47(49.1%) to the Watch category, and none to the Reserve category. Only 14.9% of antibiotic prescriptions were fully compliant with current guidelines.ConclusionThis study indicated a significant prevalence of antibiotic use and a very low compliance with guidelines at Luang Prabang provincial hospital, Lao PDR. This highlights an urgent need for comprehensive strategies at all levels to optimize antibiotic use in hospitals, emphasizing diagnostic improvements, and continued research to address the factors driving this excessive antibiotic usage and improve adherence to guidelines.