Does diagnostic uncertainty increase antibiotic prescribing in primary care?
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Wang D
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7994848 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Background: Misuse of antibiotics is prevalent worldwide and primary care is a major contributor. Although a clear diagnosis is fundamental for rational antibiotic use, primary care physicians often struggle with diagnostic uncertainty. However, we know little about how physicians cope with this situation and its association with antibiotic prescribing. Methods: A total of 583 primary care physicians were surveyed using the Dealing with Uncertainty Questionnaire. Their prescriptions (n = 949,181) over the year 2018 were retrieved retrospectively. Two categories of behavioral patterns of participants were identified based on latent class analyses (high vs. low openness and collaborativeness) in responding to diagnostic uncertainty. Multi-level logistic regression models were established to determine the associations between these behavioral patterns and antibiotic prescribing (overall and broad-spectrum antibiotics) for illness without an indication for antibiotics and those with a conditional indication for antibiotics, respectively, after adjustment for variations of patient (level one) and physician (level two) characteristics. Results: Most physicians reported open communications with their patients (80.96%), collected further information (85.08%), and referred patients to specialists (68.95%) in dealing with diagnostic uncertainly. More than half (56.95%) sought help from colleagues. Less than 20% acted on intuition or adopted a "wait and see" strategy. About 40% participants (n = 238) were classified into the group of low openness and collaborativeness in coping with diagnostic uncertainty. They were more likely to prescribe antibiotics for the recorded illness without an indication for antibiotics (AOR = 1.013 for all antibiotics, p = 0.024; AOR = 1.047 for broad-spectrum antibiotics, p < 0.001), as well as for the recorded illness with a conditional indication for antibiotics (AOR = 1.226 for all antibiotic, p < 0.001; AOR = 1.257 for broad-spectrum antibiotics, p < 0.001). Conclusion: Low tolerance with diagnostic uncertainty is evident in primary care. Inappropriate and over antibiotic prescribing is shaped by physicians' coping methods of diagnostic uncertainty. Physicians' openness and collaborativeness in responding to diagnostic uncertainty is associated with lower antibiotic prescribing in primary care. Interventions targeting on better management of diagnostic uncertainty may offer a promising approach in reducing antibiotic use in primary care.
| S-EPMC8695689 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Anti-influenza antiviral medications reduce influenza-related morbidity, but may often be used inappropriately.To measure the rate of antiviral and antibiotic prescribing, the appropriateness of antiviral prescribing, and evaluate independent predictors of antiviral and antibiotic prescribing for influenza in primary care.Retrospective analysis of 958 visits of clinician-diagnosed influenza in 21 primary care clinics in eastern Massachusetts from 1999 to 2007. We considered antiviral prescribing appropriate if patients had symptoms for 2 or fewer days, had fever, and any 2 of headache, sore throat, cough, or myalgias.Clinicians prescribed antivirals in 557 (58%) visits and antibiotics in 104 visits (11%). Of antiviral prescriptions, 38% were not appropriate, most commonly because of symptoms for more than 2 days (24% of antiviral prescriptions). In multivariate modeling, selected independent predictors of antiviral prescribing were symptom duration of 2 or fewer days (odds ratio [OR], 12.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 8.3 to 18.6), year (OR, 1.4 for each successive influenza season; 95% CI, 1.3 to 1.7), patient age (OR, 1.3 per decade; 95% CI, 1.2 to 1.5), and, compared to having no influenza testing, having a negative influenza test (OR, 5.5; 95% CI, 3.4 to 9.1) or a positive influenza test (OR, 11.4; 95% CI, 6.7 to 19.3). Independent predictors of antibiotic prescribing included otoscopic abnormalities (OR, 3.3; 95% CI, 1.8 to 6.0), abnormal lung examination (OR, 4.0; 95% CI, 2.1 to 6.2), and having a chest x-ray performed (OR, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.3 to 3.8).Primary care clinicians are much more likely to prescribe antivirals to patients with symptoms for 2 or fewer days, but also commonly prescribe antivirals inappropriately.
| S-EPMC2659164 | biostudies-other
Project description:BACKGROUND: Information about antibiotic prescribing practice in primary care is not available for Ireland, unlike other European countries. The study aimed to ascertain the types of antibiotics and the corresponding conditions seen in primary care and whether general practitioners (GPs) felt that an antibiotic was necessary at the time of consultation. This information will be vital to inform future initiatives in prudent antibiotic prescribing in primary care. METHODS: Participating GPs gathered data on all antibiotics prescribed by them in 100 consecutive patients' consultations as well as data on the conditions being treated and whether they felt the antibiotic was necessary. RESULTS: 171 GPs collected data on 16,899 consultations. An antibiotic was prescribed at 20.16% of these consultations. The majority were prescribed for symptoms or diagnoses associated with the respiratory system; the highest rate of prescribing in these consultations were for patients aged 15-64 years (62.23%). There is a high rate of 2nd and 3rd line agents being used for common ailments such as otitis media and tonsillitis. Amoxicillin, which is recommended as 1st line in most common infections, was twice as likely to be prescribed if the prescription was for deferred used or deemed unnecessary by the GP. CONCLUSION: The study demonstrates that potentially inappropriate prescribing is occurring in the adult population and the high rate of broad-spectrum antimicrobial agents is a major concern. This study also indicates that amoxicillin may be being used for its placebo effect rather than specifically for treatment of a definite bacterial infection.
| S-EPMC3430589 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundInappropriate use of antibiotics promotes antibiotic resistance. Little is known about physician characteristics that may be associated with inappropriate antibiotic prescribing. Our objective was to assess whether physician knowledge, time in practice, place of training and practice volume explain the differences in antibiotic prescribing among physicians.MethodsA historical cohort of 852 primary care physicians in Quebec who became certified between 1990 and 1993 was followed for their first 6-9 years of practice (1990-1998). We evaluated whether inappropriate antibiotic prescribing had occurred during the study period (1990-1998) for viral (prescription of antibiotics) and bacterial (prescription of second-or third-line antibiotics given orally) infections. We used logistic regression to estimate the independent contributions of time in practice, practice volume, place of medical training and scores on licensure examinations. Physician sex and visit setting were controlled for, as were patient age, sex, education, income and geographic area of residence.ResultsA total of 104 230 patients who received a diagnosis of a viral infection and 65 304 who received a diagnosis of a bacterial infection were included in our study. International medical graduates were more likely than University of Montréal graduates to prescribe antibiotics for viral respiratory infections (risk ratio [RR] 1.78, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.30-2.44). Inappropriate antibiotic prescribing increased with time in practice. Physicians with a high practice volume were more likely than those with low practice volume to prescribe antibiotics for viral respiratory infections (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.09-1.48) and to prescribe second-and third-line antibiotics as first-line treatment (RR 1.20, 95% CI 1.06-1.37). Physician scores on licensure examinations were not predictive of inappropriate antibiotic prescribing.InterpretationInternational medical graduates, physicians with high-volume practices and those who were in practice longer were more likely to prescribe antibiotics inappropriately. Developing effective interventions will require increased knowledge of the mechanisms that underlie these predictors of inappropriate antibiotic prescribing.
| S-EPMC1995156 | biostudies-literature
Project description:One-third of outpatient antibiotic prescriptions for pediatric acute respiratory tract infections (ARTIs) are inappropriate. We evaluated a distance learning program's effectiveness for reducing outpatient antibiotic prescribing for ARTI visits. In this stepped-wedge clinical trial run from November 2015 to June 2018, we randomly assigned 19 pediatric practices belonging to the Pediatric Research in Office Settings Network or the NorthShore University HealthSystem to 4 wedges. Visits for acute otitis media, bronchitis, pharyngitis, sinusitis, and upper respiratory infection for children 6 months to <11 years old without recent antibiotic use were included. Clinicians received the intervention as 3 program modules containing online tutorials and webinars on evidence-based communication strategies and antibioti c prescribing, booster video vignettes, and individualized antibiotic prescribing feedback reports over 11 months. The primary outcome was overall antibiotic prescribing rates for all ARTI visits. Mixed-effects logistic regression compared prescribing rates during each program module and a postintervention period to a baseline control period. Odds ratios were converted to adjusted rate ratios (aRRs) for interpretability. Among 72 723 ARTI visits by 29 762 patients, intention-to-treat analyses revealed a 7% decrease in the probability of antibiotic prescribing for ARTI overall between the baseline and postintervention periods (aRR 0.93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.90-0.96). Second-line antibiotic prescribing decreased for streptococcal pharyngitis (aRR 0.66; 95% CI, 0.50-0.87) and sinusitis (aRR 0.59; 95% CI, 0.44-0.77) but not for acute otitis media (aRR 0.93; 95% CI, 0.83-1.03). Any antibiotic prescribing decreased for viral ARTIs (aRR 0.60; 95% CI, 0.51-0.70). This program reduced antibiotic prescribing during outpatient ARTI visits; broader dissemination may be beneficial.
| S-EPMC7461202 | biostudies-literature
Project description:With the onset of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, pediatric ambulatory encounter volume and antibiotic prescribing both decreased; however, the durability of these reductions in pediatric primary care in the United States has not been assessed. We conducted a retrospective observational study to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and associated public health measures on antibiotic prescribing in 27 pediatric primary care practices. Encounters from January 1, 2018, through June 30, 2021, were included. The primary outcome was monthly antibiotic prescriptions per 1000 patients. Interrupted time series analysis was performed. There were 69 327 total antibiotic prescriptions from April through December in 2019 and 18 935 antibiotic prescriptions during the same months in 2020, a 72.7% reduction. The reduction in prescriptions at visits for respiratory tract infection (RTI) accounted for 87.3% of this decrease. Using interrupted time series analysis, overall antibiotic prescriptions decreased from 31.6 to 6.4 prescriptions per 1000 patients in April 2020 (difference of -25.2 prescriptions per 1000 patients; 95% CI: -32.9 to -17.5). This was followed by a nonsignificant monthly increase in antibiotic prescriptions, with prescribing beginning to rebound from April to June 2021. Encounter volume also immediately decreased, and while overall encounter volume quickly started to recover, RTI encounter volume returned more slowly. Reductions in antibiotic prescribing in pediatric primary care during the COVID-19 pandemic were sustained, only beginning to rise in 2021, primarily driven by reductions in RTI encounters. Reductions in viral RTI transmission likely played a substantial role in reduced RTI visits and antibiotic prescriptions.
| S-EPMC9825803 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Antibiotics are frequently prescribed at many of the visits to primary care clinics, often for conditions for which they provide no benefit, including viral respiratory tract infections.The aim was to evaluate primary care visits due to infectious diseases, and to estimate antibiotic prescribing and antibiotic dispensing by pharmacies.Diagnosis of infectious disease, antibiotic prescribing and dispensing data at the individual patient level were extracted for 2015 from Clalit Health Services' electronic medical records and linked to determine the condition for which the antimicrobial was prescribed.There were 6.6 million visits due to infections, representing 22% of all primary care visits. The most common events were upper respiratory tract infections (38%) and pharyngitis (10%). Highest prescription rates were for urinary tract infections (80%), otitis media (64%), pharyngitis (71%), sinusitis (63%), and lower respiratory tract infections (76%). The highest rates of undispensed prescriptions were for acute gastroenteritis, urinary tract infections, and pharyngitis (24, 23, and 16%, respectively).Infectious diseases constitute a heavy burden on primary care, with overprescribing of antibiotics. Intervention to reduce unwarranted antibiotic use is needed. In pediatric care, interventions should focus on better controlling antibiotic consumption and encouraging adherence to guidelines for upper respiratory tract infections, pharyngitis, and otitis media. In adults interventions should aim to monitor antibiotic prescribing for upper respiratory tract infections and improve adherence to guidelines for urinary tract infections.
| S-EPMC5994243 | biostudies-other
Project description:Diagnostic uncertainty is one of the largest contributory factors to the occurrence of diagnostic errors across most specialties in medicine and arguably uncertainty is greatest in primary care due to the undifferentiated symptoms primary care physicians are often presented with. Physicians can respond to diagnostic uncertainty in various ways through the interplay of a series of cognitive, emotional and ethical reactions. The consequences of such uncertainty however can impact negatively upon the primary care practitioner, their patients and the wider healthcare system. Understanding the nature of the existing empirical literature in relation to managing diagnostic uncertainty in primary medical care is a logical and necessary first step in order to understand what solutions are already available and/or to aid the development of any training or feedback aimed at better managing this uncertainty. This review is the first to characterize the existing empirical literature on managing diagnostic uncertainty in primary care.Sixteen databases were systematically searched from inception to present with no restrictions. Hand searches of relevant websites and reference lists of included studies were also conducted. Two authors conducted abstract/article screening and data extraction. PRISMA guidelines were adhered to.Ten studies met the inclusion criteria. A narrative and conceptual synthesis was undertaken under the premises of critical reviews. Results suggest that studies have focused on internal factors (traits, skills and strategies) associated with managing diagnostic uncertainty with only one external intervention identified. Cognitive factors ranged from the influences of epistemological viewpoints to practical approaches such as greater knowledge of the patient, utilizing resources to hand and using appropriate safety netting techniques. Emotional aspects of uncertainty management included clinicians embracing uncertainty and working with provisional diagnoses. Ethical aspects of uncertainty management centered on communicating diagnostic uncertainties with patients. Personality traits and characteristics influenced each of the three domains.There is little empirical evidence on how uncertainty is managed in general practice. However we highlight how the extant literature can be conceptualised into cognitive, emotional and ethical aspects of uncertainty which may help clinicians be more aware of their own biases as well as provide a platform for future research.PROSPERO registration: CRD42015027555.
| S-EPMC5545872 | biostudies-other
Project description:Objectives:To assess the appropriateness of prescribing systemic antibiotics for different clinical conditions in primary care, and to quantify 'ideal' antibiotic prescribing proportions in conditions for which antibiotic treatment is sometimes but not always indicated. Methods:Prescribing guidelines were consulted to define the appropriateness of antibiotic therapy for the conditions that resulted in antibiotic prescriptions between 2013 and 2015 in The Health Improvement Network (THIN) primary care database. The opinions of subject experts were then formally elicited to quantify ideal antibiotic prescribing proportions for 10 common conditions. Results:Of the antibiotic prescriptions in THIN, 52.5% were for conditions that could be assessed using prescribing guidelines. Among these, the vast majority of prescriptions (91.4%) were for conditions where antibiotic appropriateness is conditional on patient-specific indicators. Experts estimated low ideal prescribing proportions in acute, non-comorbid presentations of many of these conditions, such as cough (10% of patients), rhinosinusitis (11%), bronchitis (13%) and sore throat (13%). Conversely, antibiotics were believed to be appropriate in 75% of non-pregnant women with non-recurrent urinary tract infection. In impetigo and acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, experts clustered into distinct groups that believed in either high or low prescribing. Conclusions:In English primary care, most antibiotics are prescribed for conditions that only sometimes require antibiotic treatment, depending on patient-specific indicators. Experts estimated low ideal prescribing proportions in many of these conditions. Incomplete prescribing guidelines and disagreement about prescribing in some conditions highlight further research needs.
| S-EPMC5890733 | biostudies-literature
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.
| S-EPMC11332303 | biostudies-literature