C-reactive protein testing to reduce antibiotic prescribing for acute respiratory infections in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) has become a worldwide public health problem. Abuse of antibiotic in acute respiratory tract infections (ARI) contributes to the increasing AMR. C-reactive protein (CRP) testing may help reduce antibiotic overprescribing, but the available evidence quality varies widely. There is no meta-analysis of CRP testing to guide the antibiotic prescribing for adult ARI. Therefore, we conducted this meta-analysis to determine the effectiveness of CRP testing to guide antibiotic prescribing in adult ARI.Methods
We searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, and EMBASE databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving our meta-analysis from the establishment of these databases until January 16, 2021. Two reviewers extracted the data separately and pooled the data using RevMan5.3. The evidence quality was appraised strictly with GRADE system.Results
Seven studies included with 3,614 patients. Compared with routine care, CRP testing reduced antibiotic prescribing rate at the index consultation significantly [risk ratio (RR) =0.76; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.68-0.85; P<0.00001], and during 28 days follow-up (RR =0.77; 95% CI: 0.73-0.81; P<0.00001). There were no significant differences between CRP testing and routine care in clinical recovery of patients within 7 days (RR =0.95; 95% CI: 0.90-1.01; P=0.08). Moreover, adverse events were not significantly different between CRP testing and routine care.Discussion
CRP testing can reduce the antibiotic prescribing rate at index consultation and during 28 days
follow-up. These findings support the conclusion that CRP testing is valuable to guide the antibiotic prescribing for adult ARI.
SUBMITTER: Zhang K
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8828529 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:C-reactive protein (CRP) point-of-care testing (POCT) is increasingly being promoted to reduce diagnostic uncertainty and enhance antibiotic stewardship. In primary care, respiratory tract infections (RTIs) are the most common reason for inappropriate antibiotic prescribing, which is a major driver for antibiotic resistance. We systematically reviewed the available evidence on the impact of CRP-POCT on antibiotic prescribing for RTIs in primary care. Thirteen moderate to high-quality studies comprising 9844 participants met our inclusion criteria. Meta-analyses showed that CRP-POCT significantly reduced immediate antibiotic prescribing at the index consultation compared with usual care (RR 0.79, 95%CI 0.70 to 0.90, p = 0.0003, I2 = 76%) but not during 28-day (n = 7) follow-up. The immediate effect was sustained at 12 months (n = 1). In children, CRP-POCT reduced antibiotic prescribing when CRP (cut-off) guidance was provided (n = 2). Meta-analyses showed significantly higher rates of re-consultation within 30 days (n = 8, 1 significant). Clinical recovery, resolution of symptoms, and hospital admissions were not significantly different between CRP-POCT and usual care. CRP-POCT can reduce immediate antibiotic prescribing for RTIs in primary care (number needed to (NNT) for benefit = 8) at the expense of increased re-consultations (NNT for harm = 27). The increase in re-consultations and longer-term effects of CRP-POCT need further evaluation. Overall, the benefits of CRP-POCT outweigh the potential harms (NNTnet = 11).
| S-EPMC7559694 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Importance:Acute respiratory infections (ARIs) are the syndrome for which antibiotics are most commonly prescribed; viruses for which antibiotics are ineffective cause most ARIs. Objectives:To characterize antibiotic prescribing among outpatients with ARI during influenza season and to identify targets for reducing inappropriate antibiotic prescribing for common ARI diagnoses, including among outpatients with laboratory-confirmed influenza. Design, Setting, and Participants:Cohort study enrolling outpatients aged 6 months or older with ARI evaluated at outpatient clinics associated with 5 US Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network sites during the 2013-2014 and 2014-2015 influenza seasons. All patients received influenza testing by real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction for research purposes only. Antibiotic prescriptions, medical history, and International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision diagnosis codes were collected from medical and pharmacy records, as were group A streptococcal (GAS) testing results in a patient subset. Exposure:Visit for ARI, defined by a new cough of 7 days' duration or less. Main Outcomes and Measures:Antibiotic prescription within 7 days of enrollment. Appropriateness of antibiotic prescribing was based on diagnosis codes, clinical information, and influenza and GAS testing results. Results:Of 14?987 patients with ARI (mean [SD] age, 32 [24] years; 8638 [58%] women; 11?892 [80%] white), 6136 (41%) were prescribed an antibiotic. Among these 6136 patients, 2522 (41%) had diagnoses for which antibiotics are not indicated; 2106 (84%) of these patients were diagnosed as having a viral upper respiratory tract infection or bronchitis (acute or not otherwise specified). Among the 3306 patients (22%) not diagnosed as having pneumonia and who had laboratory-confirmed influenza, 945 (29%) were prescribed an antibiotic, accounting for 17% of all antibiotic prescriptions among patients with nonpneumonia ARI. Among 1248 patients with pharyngitis, 1137 (91%) had GAS testing; 440 of the 1248 patients (35%) were prescribed antibiotics, among whom 168 (38%) had negative results on GAS testing. Of 1200 patients with sinusitis and no other indication for antibiotic treatment who received an antibiotic, 454 (38%) had symptoms for 3 days or less prior to the outpatient visit, suggesting acute viral sinusitis not requiring antibiotics. Conclusions and Relevance:Antibiotic overuse remains widespread in the treatment of outpatient ARIs, including among patients with laboratory-confirmed influenza, although study sites may not be representative of other outpatient settings. Identified targets for improved outpatient antibiotic stewardship include eliminating antibiotic treatment of viral upper respiratory tract infections and bronchitis and improving adherence to prescribing guidelines for pharyngitis and sinusitis. Increased access to sensitive and timely virus diagnostic tests, particularly for influenza, may reduce unnecessary antibiotic use for these syndromes.
| S-EPMC6324415 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAcute respiratory infections are the most common symptomatic reason for seeking care among patients in the US, and account for the majority of all antibiotic prescribing, yet a large fraction of antibiotic prescriptions are inappropriate.ObjectiveWe sought to identify the underlying factors driving variation in antibiotic prescribing across clinicians and settings.Design, participantsUsing electronic health data for adult ambulatory visits for acute respiratory infections to a retail clinic chain and primary care practices from an integrated healthcare system, we identified a random sample of clinicians for survey.Main measuresWe evaluated independent predictors of overall prescribing and imperfect antibiotic prescribing, controlling for clinician and site of care. We defined imperfect antibiotic prescribing as prescribing for non-antibiotic-appropriate diagnoses, failure to prescribe for an antibiotic-appropriate diagnosis, or prescribing a non-guideline-concordant antibiotic.Key resultsResponse rates were 34 % for retail clinics and 24 % for physicians' offices (N = 187). Clinicians in physicians' offices prescribed antibiotics less often than those in retail clinics (53 % versus 67 %; p < 0.01), but had a higher imperfect antibiotic prescribing rate (65 % versus 31 %; p < 0.01). Feeling rushed was associated with higher antibiotic prescribing (OR 1.34; 95 % CI 1.03, 1.75). Antibiotic prescribing was also associated with clinician disagreement that antibiotics are overused (OR 1.60, 95 % CI, 1.16, 2.20). Imperfect antibiotic prescribing was associated with receiving antibiotic prescribing feedback (OR 1.35, 95 % CI 1.04, 1.75) and disagreement that patient demand was a problem (OR 1.66, 95 % CI 1.00, 2.73). Imperfect antibiotic prescribing was less common with clinicians who perceived that they prescribed antibiotics less often than their peers (OR 0.63, 95 % CI 0.46, 0.87).ConclusionsPoor-quality antibiotic prescribing was associated with feeling rushed, believing less strongly that antibiotics were overused, and believing that patient demand was not an issue, factors that can be assessed and addressed in future interventions.
| S-EPMC4945551 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundOutpatient antibiotic prescribing for acute upper respiratory infections (URIs) is a high-priority target for antimicrobial stewardship that has not been described for cancer patients.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study of adult patients at an ambulatory cancer center with URI diagnoses from 1 October 2015 to 30 September 2016. We obtained antimicrobial prescribing, respiratory viral testing, and other clinical data at first encounter for the URI through day 14. We used generalized estimating equations to test associations of baseline factors with antibiotic prescribing.ResultsOf 341 charts reviewed, 251 (74%) patients were eligible for analysis. Nearly one-third (32%) of patients were prescribed antibiotics for URIs. Respiratory viruses were detected among 85 (75%) of 113 patients tested. Antibiotic prescribing (P = .001) and viral testing (P < .001) varied by clinical service. Sputum production or chest congestion was associated with higher risk of antibiotic prescribing (relative risk [RR], 2.3; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.4-3.8; P < .001). Viral testing on day 0 was associated with lower risk of antibiotic prescribing (RR, 0.4; 95% CI 0.2-0.8; P = .01), though collinearity between viral testing and clinical service limited our ability to separate these effects on prescribing.ConclusionsNearly one-third of hematology-oncology outpatients were prescribed antibiotics for URIs, despite viral etiologies identified among 75% of those tested. Antibiotic prescribing was significantly lower among patients who received an initial respiratory viral test. The role of viral testing in antibiotic prescribing for URIs in outpatient oncology settings merits further study.
| S-EPMC7108137 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Unjustified antibiotic prescribing for acute upper respiratory infections (URTIs) is probably more common in poor-resource settings where physicians are scarce. Introducing C-reactive protein (CRP) point-of-care testing in such settings could reduce the misuse of antibiotics, which could avert antibiotic resistance. However, information useful for the applicability of CRP test in resource-limited settings is lacking. This study aimed to elicit the frequency of antibiotic prescribing and distribution of CRP levels in remote, rural settings in Ethiopia. We included 414 patients with acute URTIs from four health centres. Health professionals recorded the clinical features of the patients, but the laboratory professionals measured the CRP levels of all patients at the point of care. The most prominent respiratory causes for consultation were acute URTIs combined (44.4%), and lower respiratory tract infections-pneumonia (29.71%) and acute bronchitis (25.84%). The CRP distribution was <20 mg/l, 20-99 mg/l and 100 mg/l or more in 66.6%, 27.9% and 5.5% of the patients, respectively. The CRP levels were significantly different among these clinical diagnoses (X(2)=114.3, P<0.001, d.f.=4). A wide range of antibiotics was administered for 87.8% of the patients, regardless of the diagnostic or prognostic nature of their diseases. Antibiotic prescribing for acute URTIs in the rural areas of Ethiopia is unduly high, with high proportions of mild, self-limiting illness, mostly URTIs. Implementation of CRP point-of-care testing in such resource-constrained settings, with low- or middle-grade healthcare professionals, could help reconcile the inappropriate use of antibiotics by withholding from patients who do not benefit from antibiotic treatment.
| S-EPMC4714524 | biostudies-other
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:BACKGROUND:Acute respiratory tract infections (ARIs) are common in the outpatient setting. Although they are predominantly viral, antibiotics are often prescribed for the treatment of ARIs. METHODS:Using the U.S. Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS; 2010-2015), we estimated the national prevalence and predictors of outpatient antibiotic prescribing for ARIs by provider type. We categorized the trends of antibiotic prescriptions (overall or broad-spectrum) for ARIs by provider type (physician and advanced practice provider [APP] which includes nurse practitioner [NP], and physician assistant [PA]). The outcome variable was defined as receipt of an antibiotic prescription during a consultation with a provider for an ARI (including outpatient clinic visit or doctor's office visit). RESULTS:There were 64,081,892 ARI antibiotic prescriptions written, with a decrease from 10.9 (2010) to 9.7 million (2015) during the study interval (p?<?0.0001). Associations of patient- and provider-level variables with antibiotics prescription were examined using binary logistic regression. Blacks were more likely to receive antibiotics than whites (OR 1.51; 95% CI 1.25, 1.84; p?<?0.001), and antibiotic prescription was more likely if the patient-provider race was concordant (OR 5.41; 95% CI 4.65, 6.29, p?<?0.0001). Although the majority of patients with ARI were cared for by physicians, APPs were seeing an increasing number of ARI patients. CONCLUSIONS:Antibiotic prescribing for ARIs though declining, remains high. More research is needed to better understand the drivers of ARI antibiotic prescribing and to develop targeted interventions for both patients and providers.
| S-EPMC6607511 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Understanding the decision-making strategies of general practitioners (GPs) could help reduce suboptimal antibiotic prescribing. Respiratory tract infections (RTIs) are the most common reason for inappropriate antibiotic prescribing in primary care, a key driver of antibiotic resistance (ABR). We conducted a nationwide prospective web-based survey to explore: (1) The role of C-reactive protein (CRP) point-of-care testing (POCT) on antibiotic prescribing decision-making for RTIs using case vignettes; and (2) the knowledge, attitudes and barriers/facilitators of antibiotic prescribing using deductive analysis. Most GPs (92-98%) selected CRP-POCT alone or combined with other diagnostics. GPs would use lower CRP cut-offs to guide prescribing for (more) severe RTIs than for uncomplicated RTIs. Intermediate CRP ranges were significantly wider for uncomplicated than for (more) severe RTIs (p = 0.001). Amoxicillin/clavulanic acid was the most frequently recommended antibiotic across all RTI case scenarios (65-87%). Faced with intermediate CRP results, GPs preferred 3-5-day follow-up to delayed prescribing or other clinical approaches. Patient pressure, diagnostic uncertainty, fear of complications and lack of ABR understanding were the most GP-reported barriers to appropriate antibiotic prescribing. Stewardship interventions considering CRP-POCT and the barriers and facilitators to appropriate prescribing could guide antibiotic prescribing decisions at the point of care.
| S-EPMC9137646 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundInappropriate prescribing of antibiotics for acute respiratory infections at the primary care level represents the major source of antibiotic misuse in healthcare, and is a major driver for antimicrobial resistance worldwide. In this study we will develop, pilot and evaluate the effectiveness of a comprehensive antibiotic stewardship programme in China's primary care hospitals to reduce inappropriate prescribing of antibiotics for acute respiratory infections among all ages.MethodsWe will use a parallel-group, cluster-randomised, controlled, superiority trial with blinded outcome evaluation but unblinded treatment (providers and patients). We will randomise 34 primary care hospitals from two counties within Guangdong province into the intervention and control arm (1:1 overall ratio) stratified by county (8:9 within-county ratio). In the control arm, antibiotic prescribing and management will continue through usual care. In the intervention arm, we will implement an antibiotic stewardship programme targeting family physicians and patients/caregivers. The family physician components include: (1) training using new operational guidelines, (2) improved management and peer-review of antibiotic prescribing, (3) improved electronic medical records and smart phone app facilitation. The patient/caregiver component involves patient education via family physicians, leaflets and videos. The primary outcome is the proportion of prescriptions for acute respiratory infections (excluding pneumonia) that contain any antibiotic(s). Secondary outcomes will address how frequently specific classes of antibiotics are prescribed, how frequently key non-antibiotic alternatives are prescribed and the costs of consultations. We will conduct a qualitative process evaluation to explore operational questions regarding acceptability, cultural appropriateness and burden of technology use, as well as a cost-effectiveness analysis and a long-term benefit evaluation. The duration of the intervention will be 12 months, with another 24 months' post-trial long-term follow-up.DiscussionOur study is one of the first trials to evaluate the effect of an antibiotic stewardship programme in primary care settings in a low- or middle-income country (LMIC). All interventional activities will be designed to be embedded into routine primary care with strong local ownership. Through the trial we intend to impact on clinical practice and national policy in antibiotic prescription for primary care facilities in rural China and other LMICs.Trial registrationISRCTN, ID: ISRCTN96892547. Registered on 18 August 2019.
| S-EPMC7216131 | 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