Figure Correction: Antibiotic Prescription Rates After eVisits Versus Office Visits in Primary Care: Observational Study.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Entezarjou A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8726763 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Nov
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Figure Correction: Antibiotic Prescription Rates After eVisits Versus Office Visits in Primary Care: Observational Study.
Entezarjou Artin A Calling Susanna S Bhattacharyya Tapomita T Nymberg Veronica Milos VM Vigren Lina L Labaf Ashkan A Jakobsson Ulf U Midlöv Patrik P
JMIR medical informatics 20211126 11
[This corrects the article DOI: 10.2196/25473.]. ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundDirect-to-consumer telemedicine is an increasingly used modality to access primary care. Previous research on assessment using synchronous virtual visits showed mixed results regarding antibiotic prescription rates, and research on assessment using asynchronous chat-based eVisits is lacking.ObjectiveThe goal of the research was to investigate if eVisit management of sore throat, other respiratory symptoms, or dysuria leads to higher rates of antibiotic prescription compared with usual management using physical office visits.MethodsData from 3847 eVisits and 759 office visits for sore throat, dysuria, or respiratory symptoms were acquired from a large private health care provider in Sweden. Data were analyzed to compare antibiotic prescription rates within 3 days, antibiotic type, and diagnoses made. For a subset of sore throat visits (n=160 eVisits, n=125 office visits), Centor criteria data were manually extracted and validated.ResultsAntibiotic prescription rates were lower following eVisits compared with office visits for sore throat (169/798, 21.2%, vs 124/312, 39.7%; P<.001) and respiratory symptoms (27/1724, 1.6%, vs 50/251, 19.9%; P<.001), while no significant differences were noted comparing eVisits to office visits for dysuria (1016/1325, 76.7%, vs 143/196, 73.0%; P=.25). Guideline-recommended antibiotics were prescribed similarly following sore throat eVisits and office visits (163/169, 96.4%, vs 117/124, 94.4%; P=.39). eVisits for respiratory symptoms and dysuria were more often prescribed guideline-recommended antibiotics (26/27, 96.3%, vs 37/50, 74.0%; P=.02 and 1009/1016, 99.3%, vs 135/143, 94.4%; P<.001, respectively). Odds ratios of antibiotic prescription following office visits compared with eVisits after adjusting for age and differences in set diagnoses were 2.94 (95% CI 1.99-4.33), 11.57 (95% CI 5.50-24.32), 1.01 (95% CI 0.66-1.53), for sore throat, respiratory symptoms, and dysuria, respectively.ConclusionsThe use of asynchronous eVisits for the management of sore throat, dysuria, and respiratory symptoms is not associated with an inherent overprescription of antibiotics compared with office visits.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03474887; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03474887.
| S-EPMC8077790 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Uncomplicated urinary tract infections (UTI) are common in primary care. Whilst primary care physicians are called to be antimicrobial stewards, there is limited primary care antibiotic resistance surveillance and physician antibiotic prescription data available in southern Chinese primary care. The study aimed to investigate the antibiotic resistance rate and antibiotic prescription patterns in female patients with uncomplicated UTI. Factors associated with antibiotic resistance and prescription was explored. A prospective cohort study was conducted in 12 primary care group clinics in Hong Kong of patients presenting with symptoms of uncomplicated UTI from January 2012 to December 2013. Patients' characteristics such as age, comorbidity, presenting symptoms and prior antibiotic use were recorded by physicians, as well as any empirical antibiotic prescription given at presentation. Urine samples were collected to test for antibiotic resistance of uropathogens. Univariate analysis was conducted to identify factors associated with antibiotic resistance and prescription. A total of 298 patients were included in the study. E. coli was detected in 107 (76%) out of the 141 positive urine samples. Antibiotic resistance rates of E. coli isolates for ampicillin, co-trimoxazole, ciprofloxacin, amoxicillin and nitrofurantoin were 59.8%, 31.8%, 23.4%, 1.9% and 0.9% respectively. E. coli isolates were sensitive to nitrofurantoin (98.1%) followed by amoxicillin (78.5%). The overall physician antibiotic prescription rate was 82.2%. Amoxicillin (39.6%) and nitrofurantoin (28.6%) were the most common prescribed antibiotics. Meanwhile, whilst physicians in public primary care prescribed more amoxicillin (OR: 2.84, 95% CI: 1.67 to 4.85, P<0.001) and nitrofurantoin (OR: 2.01, 95% CI: 1.14 to 3.55, P = 0.015), physicians in private clinics prescribed more cefuroxime and ciprofloxacin (P<0.05). Matching of antibiotic prescription and antibiotic sensitivity of E. coli isolates occurred in public than private primary care prescriptions (OR: 6.72, 95% CI: 2.07 to 21.80 P = 0.001) and for other uropathogens (OR: 6.19, 95% CI: 1.04 to 36.78 P = 0.034). Mismatching differences of antibiotic prescription and resistance were not evident. In conclusion, nitrofurantoin and amoxicillin should be used as first line antibiotic treatment for uncomplicated UTI. There were significant differences in antibiotic prescription patterns between public and private primary care. Public primary care practitioners were more likely to prescribe first line antibiotic treatment which match antibiotic sensitivity of E. coli isolates and other uropathogens. Further exploration of physician prescribing behaviour and educational interventions, particularly in private primary care may helpful. Meanwhile, development and dissemination of guidelines for primary care management of uncomplicated UTI as well as continued surveillance of antibiotic resistance and physician antibiotic prescription is recommended.
| S-EPMC5423680 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7444592 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We performed a retrospective analysis spanning ten years of pediatric practice focused on patients with variable vaccination born into a practice, presenting a unique opportunity to study the effects of variable vaccination on outcomes. The average total incidence of billed office visits per outcome related to the outcomes were compared across groups (Relative Incidence of Office Visit (RIOV)). RIOV is shown to be more powerful than odds ratio of diagnoses. Full cohort, cumulative incidence analyses, matched for days of care, and matched for family history analyses were conducted across quantiles of vaccine uptake. Increased office visits related to many diagnoses were robust to days-of-care-matched analyses, family history, gender block, age block, and false discovery risk. Many outcomes had high RIOV odds ratios after matching for days-of-care (e.g., anemia (6.334), asthma (3.496), allergic rhinitis (6.479), and sinusitis (3.529), all significant under the Z-test). Developmental disorders were determined to be difficult to study due to extremely low prevalence in the practice, potentially attributable to high rates of vaccine cessation upon adverse events and family history of autoimmunity. Remarkably, zero of the 561 unvaccinated patients in the study had attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) compared to 0.063% of the (partially and fully) vaccinated. The implications of these results for the net public health effects of whole-population vaccination and with respect for informed consent on human health are compelling. Our results give agency to calls for research conducted by individuals who are independent of any funding sources related to the vaccine industry. While the low rates of developmental disorders prevented sufficiently powered hypothesis testing, it is notable that the overall rate of autism spectrum disorder (0.84%) in the cohort is half that of the US national rate (1.69%). The practice-wide rate of ADHD was roughly half of the national rate. The data indicate that unvaccinated children in the practice are not unhealthier than the vaccinated and indeed the overall results may indicate that the unvaccinated pediatric patients in this practice are healthier overall than the vaccinated.
| S-EPMC7709050 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveAmid electronic health records, laboratory tests, and other technology, office-based patient and provider communication is still the heart of primary medical care. Patients typically present multiple complaints, requiring physicians to decide how to balance competing demands. How this time is allocated has implications for patient satisfaction, payments, and quality of care. We investigate the effectiveness of machine learning methods for automated annotation of medical topics in patient-provider dialog transcripts.Materials and methodsWe used dialog transcripts from 279 primary care visits to predict talk-turn topic labels. Different machine learning models were trained to operate on single or multiple local talk-turns (logistic classifiers, support vector machines, gated recurrent units) as well as sequential models that integrate information across talk-turn sequences (conditional random fields, hidden Markov models, and hierarchical gated recurrent units).ResultsEvaluation was performed using cross-validation to measure 1) classification accuracy for talk-turns and 2) precision, recall, and F1 scores at the visit level. Experimental results showed that sequential models had higher classification accuracy at the talk-turn level and higher precision at the visit level. Independent models had higher recall scores at the visit level compared with sequential models.ConclusionsIncorporating sequential information across talk-turns improves the accuracy of topic prediction in patient-provider dialog by smoothing out noisy information from talk-turns. Although the results are promising, more advanced prediction techniques and larger labeled datasets will likely be required to achieve prediction performance appropriate for real-world clinical applications.
| S-EPMC6857514 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMany antibiotics prescribed in the outpatient setting result from upper respiratory tract infections (URTIs); however, these infections are often viral. Virtual visits have emerged as a popular alternative to office visits for URTIs and may be an important target for antimicrobial stewardship programs.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study evaluated adult patients diagnosed with sinusitis treated within a single primary care network. The primary objective was to compare guideline-concordant diagnosis between patients treated via virtual visits vs in-office visits. Guideline-concordant bacterial sinusitis diagnosis was based on national guideline recommendations. Secondary objectives included comparing guideline-concordant antibiotic prescribing between groups and 24-hour, 7-day, and 30-day revisits.ResultsA total of 350 patients were included in the study, with 175 in each group. Patients treated for sinusitis were more likely to receive a guideline-concordant diagnosis in the virtual visit group (69.1% vs 45.7%; P < .001). Additionally, patients who completed virtual visits were less likely to receive antibiotics (68.6% vs 94.3%; P < .001). Guideline-concordant antibiotic selection was similar between groups (67.5% vs 64.8%; P = .641). The median duration of therapy in both groups was 10 days (P = .88). Patients completing virtual visits were more likely to revisit for sinusitis within 24 hours (8% vs 1.7%; P = .006) and within 30 days (14.9% vs 7.4%; P = .027).ConclusionsIn adult patients presenting with sinusitis, care at a virtual visit was associated with an increase in guideline-concordant diagnosis and a decrease in antibiotic prescribing compared with in-office primary care visits. Virtual visit platforms may be a valuable tool for antimicrobial stewardship programs in the outpatient setting.
| S-EPMC6778270 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAntimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a global public health disaster driven largely by antibiotic use in human health care. Doctors considering whether to prescribe antibiotics face an ethical conflict between upholding individual patient health and advancing public health aims. Existing literature mainly examines whether patients awaiting consultations desire or expect to receive antibiotic prescriptions, but does not report views of the wider public regarding conditions under which doctors should prescribe antibiotics. It also does not explore the ethical significance of public views or their sensitivity to awareness of AMR risks or the standpoint (self-interested or impartial) taken by participants.MethodsAn online survey was conducted with a sample of the U.S. public (n = 158). Participants were asked to indicate what relative priority should be given to individual patients and society-at-large from various standpoints and in various contexts, including antibiotic prescription.ResultsOf the participants, 50.3% thought that doctors should generally prioritize individual patients over society, whereas 32.0% prioritized society over individual patients. When asked in the context of AMR, 39.2% prioritized individuals whereas 45.5% prioritized society. Participants were significantly less willing to prioritize society over individuals when they themselves were the patient, both in general (p = .001) and in relation to AMR specifically (p = .006).ConclusionsParticipants' attitudes were more oriented to society and sensitive to collective responsibility when informed about the social costs of antibiotic use and when considered from a third-person rather than first-person perspective. That is, as participants came closer to taking the perspective of an informed and impartial "ideal observer," their support for prioritizing society increased. Our findings suggest that, insofar as antibiotic policies and practices should be informed by attitudes that are impartial and well-informed, there is significant support for prioritizing society.
| S-EPMC6446247 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe relationship between worklife factors, clinician outcomes, and time pressure during office visits is unclear.ObjectiveTo quantify associations between time pressure, workplace characteristics ,and clinician outcomes.DesignProspective analysis of data from the Healthy Work Place randomized trial.Participants168 physicians and advanced practice clinicians in 34 primary care practices in Upper Midwest and East Coast.Main measures and methodsTime pressure was present when clinicians needed more time than allotted to provide quality care. Other metrics included work control, work pace (calm to chaotic), organizational culture and clinician satisfaction, stress, burnout, and intent to leave the practice. Hierarchical analysis assessed relationships between time pressure, organizational characteristics, and clinician outcomes. Adjusted differences between clinicians with and without time pressure were expressed as effect sizes (ESs).Key resultsSixty-seven percent of clinicians needed more time for new patients and 53% needed additional time for follow-up appointments. Time pressure in new patient visits was more prevalent in general internists than in family physicians (74% vs 55%, p?<?0.05), women versus men (78% vs 55%, p?<?0.01), and clinicians with larger numbers of complex psychosocial (81% vs 59%, p?<?0.01) and Limited English Proficiency patients (95% vs 57%, p?<?0.001). Time pressure in new patient visits was associated with lack of control, clinician stress, and intent to leave (ESs small to moderate, p?<?0.05). Time pressure in follow-up visits was associated with chaotic workplaces and burnout (small to moderate ESs, p's?<?0.05). Time pressure improved over time in workplaces with values alignment and an emphasis on quality.ConclusionsTime pressure, more common in women and general internists, was related to chaos, control and culture, and stress, burnout, and intent to leave. Future studies should evaluate these findings in larger and more geographically diverse samples.
| S-EPMC7018911 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:One of several strategies developed to reduce inappropriate antibiotic use in situations where the indication is not clear is delayed antibiotic prescription (DAP), defined as an antibiotic prescription issued for the patient to take only in case of feeling worse or not feeling better several days after the visit. We conducted a survey to identify DAP use in Spanish primary care settings. METHODS:We surveyed 23 healthcare centers located in 4 autonomous regions where a randomized controlled trial (RCT) on DAP was underway. The primary variable was use of DAP. Categorical and quantitative variables were analyzed by means of the chi-squared test and non-parametric tests, respectively. RESULTS:The survey was sent to 375 healthcare professionals, 215 of whom responded (57.3% response rate), with 46% of these respondents declaring that they had used DAP in routine practice before the RCT started (66.6% afterwards), mostly (91.5%) for respiratory tract infections (RTIs), followed by urinary infections (45.1%). Regarding DAP use for RTIs, the most frequent conditions were pharyngotonsillitis (88.7%), acute bronchitis (62.7%), mild chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbations (59.9%), sinusitis (51.4%), and acute otitis media (45.1%). Most respondents considered that DAP reduced emergency visits (85.4%), scheduled visits (79%) and inappropriate antibiotic use (73.7%) and most also perceived patients to be generally satisfied with the DAP approach (75.6%). Having participated or not in the DAP RCT (74.1% versus 46.2%; p < 0.001), having previously used or not used DAP (86.8% versus 44.2%; p < 0.001), and being a physician versus being a nurse (81.8% versus 18.2%; p < 0.001) were factors that reflected significantly higher rates of DAP use. CONCLUSIONS:The majority of primary healthcare professionals in Spain do not use DAP. Those who use DAP believe that it reduces primary care visits and inappropriate antibiotic use, while maintaining patient satisfaction. Given the limited use of DAP in our setting, and given that its use is mainly limited to RTIs, DAP has considerable potential in terms of its implementation in routine practice.
| S-EPMC6434640 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDespite the low rate of bacterial co-infection, antibiotics are very commonly prescribed in hospitalised COVID-19 patients.Research questionDoes the use of a PCT-guided antibiotic protocol safely reduce the use of antibiotics in patients with a COVID-19 infection?Study design and methodsIn this multicentre cohort, 3 groups of COVID-19 patients were compared in terms of antibiotic consumption, namely one group treated based on a PCT-algorithm in one hospital (n=216) and 2 control groups, consisted of patients from the same hospital (n=57) and of patients from 3 similar hospitals (n=486) without PCT measurements during the same period. The primary endpoint was antibiotic prescription in the first week of admission.ResultsAntibiotic prescription during the first 7 days was 26.8% in the PCT-group, 43.9% in the non-PCT group in the same hospital and 44.7% in the non-PCT group in other hospitals. Patients in the PCT-group had lower odds of receiving antibiotics in the first 7 days of admission (OR 0.33; 0.16 - 0.66 compared to the same hospital and OR 0.42; 95% CI 0.28 - 0.62 compared to the other hospitals). The proportion of patients receiving antibiotic prescription during the total admission was respectively 35.2%, 43.9% and 54.5%. The PCT-group had lower odds of receiving antibiotics during the total admission only when compared to the other hospitals (OR 0.23; 95%CI 0.08 - 0.63). There were no significant differences in other secondary endpoints, except for re-admission in the PCT-group versus the other hospitals group.InterpretationPCT-guided antibiotic prescription reduces antibiotic prescription rates in hospitalised patients with COVID-19, without major safety concerns.
| S-EPMC10132833 | biostudies-literature