Dataset Information

Encouraging rational antibiotic prescribing behaviour in primary care - prescribing practice among children aged 0-4 years 2016-2018: an observational study.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To study antibiotic prescriptions among 0- to 4-year-old children before and after implementing a quality project on prudent prescribing of antibiotics in primary healthcare in the capital region of Iceland.

Design

An observational, descriptive, retrospective study using quantitative methodology.

Setting

Primary healthcare in the Reykjavik area with a total population of approximately 220,000.

Subjects

A total of 6420 children 0-4 years of age presenting at the primary healthcare centres in the metropolitan area over three years from 2016 to 2018.

Main outcome measures

Reduction of antibiotic prescriptions and change in antibiotic profile. Data on antibiotic prescriptions for children 0-4 years of age was obtained from the medical records. Out-of-hours prescriptions were not included in the database.

Results

The number of prescriptions during the study period ranged from 263.6 to 289.6 prescriptions/1000 inhabitants/year. A reduction of 9% in the total number of prescriptions between 2017-2018 was observed. More than half of all prescriptions were for otitis media, followed by pneumonia and skin infections. Amoxicillin accounted for over half of all prescriptions, increasing between 2016 and 2018 by 51.3%. During this period, the prescribing of co-amoxiclav and macrolides decreased by 52.3% and 40.7%, respectively. These changes were significant in all cases, p < 0.0001.

Conclusion

The results show an overall decrease in antibiotic prescribing concurrent with a change in the choice of antibiotics prescribed and in line with the recommendations presented in the prescribing guidelines implemented by the Primary Healthcare of the Capital Area, and consistent with the project's goals.Key pointsA substantial proportion of antibiotic prescribing can be considered inappropriate and the antibiotic prescription rate is highest in Iceland of the Nordic countries.After implementing guidance on the treatment of common infections together with feedback on antibiotic prescribing, a decrease in the total number of prescriptions accompanied by a shift in the antibiotic profile was observed.

SUBMITTER: Gunnlaugsdottir MR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8475099 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background: Despite availability of clinical guidelines, underdiagnosis, undertreatment, and poor adherence are still significant concerns in allergic rhinitis (AR) therapeutic management. We investigated clinical practice patterns and prescribing behavior of Italian healthcare professionals (HCPs) specialized in AR.Methods: One-hundred allergologists, 100 ear, nose and throat (ENT) specialists, and 150 general practitioners (GPs) were recruited. The survey assessed: socio-demographic, work experience, monthly caseload, prescription drivers. Next, HCPs were invited to retrospectively recover patients' clinical data to investigate: AR clinical characteristics, therapy management, prescription patterns, patient adherence. Descriptive statistics, Chi square, One-Way analysis of variance, and Two-Way Analysis of Variance were performed.Results: Allergologists visited more AR patients (31% of monthly caseload) than ENTs (21%, p?<?0.001), while GPs' caseload was the lowest (6%). Clinical information of 2823 patients were retrieved of whom 1906 (67.5%) suffered from moderate/severe AR (discomfort score: 7.7?±?1.3) and 917 (32.4%) from mild AR (5.7?±?1.9). About one-third of mild patients had a discomfort score???7. Main prescription drivers were "effective on all symptoms" (54.3% patients) and "quick symptom relief" (47.8%), whereas minor drivers were "affordable price" (13.4%) and "refundable" (8.7%). The most prescribed drugs were antihistamines and intranasal corticosteroids (79% and 55% prescriptions), followed by fixed-dose-combination of intranasal azelastine/fluticasone (19%). Polytherapy was the most common treatment strategy (59.6%). HCPs' believe that the majority of the patients was adherent to treatment (88% with score?>?7).Conclusions: This survey describes the therapeutic approach adopted by Italian physicians to cope with AR and shows that HCPs underestimated AR severity and had a non-realistic perception of patients' adherence. These findings suggest that further efforts are required to improve AR clinical management in Italy.

Project description:BackgroundInterventions designed to narrow the gap between research findings and clinical practice may be effective, but also costly. Economic evaluations are necessary to judge whether such interventions are worth the effort. We have evaluated the economic effects of a tailored intervention to support the implementation of guidelines for the use of antihypertensive and cholesterol-lowering drugs. The tailored intervention was evaluated in a randomized trial, and was shown to significantly increase the use of thiazides for patients started on antihypertensive medication, but had little or no impact on other outcomes. The increased use of thiazides was not expected to have an impact on health outcomes.Methods and findingsWe performed cost-minimization and cost-effectiveness analyses on data from a randomized trial involving 146 general practices from two geographical areas in Norway. Each practice was randomized to either the tailored intervention (70 practices; 257 physicians) or control group (69 practices; 244 physicians). Only patients that were being started on antihypertensive medication were included in the analyses. A multifaceted intervention was tailored to address identified barriers to change. Key components were an educational outreach visit with audit and feedback, and computerized reminders. Pharmacists conducted the visits. A cost-minimization framework was adopted, where the costs of intervention were set against the reduced treatment costs (principally due to increased use of thiazides rather than more expensive medication). The cost-effectiveness of the intervention was estimated as the cost per additional patient being started on thiazides. The net annual cost (cost minimization) in our study population was 53,395 US dollars, corresponding to 763 US dollars per practice. The cost per additional patient started on thiazides (cost-effectiveness) was 454 US dollars. The net annual savings in a national program was modeled to be 761,998 US dollars, or 540 US dollars per practice after 2 y. In this scenario the savings exceeded the costs in all but two of the sensitivity analyses we conducted, and the cost-effectiveness was estimated to be 183 US dollars.ConclusionsWe found a significant shift in prescribing of antihypertensive drugs towards the use of thiazides in our trial. A major reason to promote the use of thiazides is their lower price compared to other drugs. The cost of the intervention was more than twice the savings within the time frame of our study. However, we predict modest savings over a 2-y period.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Antibiotic prescribing in dentistry accounts for 9% of total antibiotic prescriptions in Scottish primary care. The Scottish Dental Clinical Effectiveness Programme (SDCEP) published guidance in April 2008 (2nd edition, August 2011) for Drug Prescribing in Dentistry, which aims to assist dentists to make evidence-based antibiotic prescribing decisions. However, wide variation in prescribing persists and the overall use of antibiotics is increasing. METHODS:RAPiD is a 12-month partial factorial cluster randomised trial conducted in NHS General Dental Practices across Scotland. Its aim is to compare the effectiveness of individualised audit and feedback (A&F) strategies for the translation into practice of SDCEP recommendations on antibiotic prescribing. The trial uses routinely collected electronic healthcare data in five aspects of its design in order to: identify the study population; apply eligibility criteria; carry out stratified randomisation; generate the trial intervention; analyse trial outcomes. Eligibility was determined on contract status and a minimum level of recent NHS treatment provision. All eligible dental practices in Scotland were simultaneously randomised at baseline either to current audit practice or to an intervention group. Randomisation was stratified by single-handed/multi-handed practices. General dental practitioners (GDPs) working at intervention practices will receive individualised graphical representations of their antibiotic prescribing rate from the previous 14 months at baseline and an update at six months. GDPs could not be blinded to their practice allocation. Intervention practices were further randomised using a factorial design to receive feedback with or without: a health board comparator; a supplementary text-based intervention; additional feedback at nine months. The primary outcome is the total antibiotic prescribing rate per 100 courses of treatment over the year following delivery of the baseline intervention. A concurrent qualitative process evaluation will apply theory-based approaches using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research to explore the acceptability of the interventions and the Theoretical Domains Framework to identify barriers and enablers to evidence-based antibiotic prescribing behaviour by GDPs. DISCUSSION:RAPiD will provide a robust evaluation of A&F in dentistry in Scotland. It also demonstrates that linked administrative datasets have the potential to be used efficiently and effectively across all stages of an randomised controlled trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN49204710.