Determinants of antibiotic over-prescribing for upper respiratory tract infections in an emergency department with good primary care access: a quantitative analysis

Factors contributing to the variation in antibiotic prescribing among primary health care physicians: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Antibiotic resistance is growing globally. The practice of health professionals when prescribing antibiotics in primary health care settings significantly impacts antibiotic resistance. Antibiotic prescription is a complex process influenced by various internal and external factors. This systematic review aims to summarize the available evidence regarding factors contributing to the variation in antibiotic prescribing among physicians in primary healthcare settings.

METHODS

This systematic review was conducted based on PRISMA guidelines. We included qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods studies that examined factors influencing prescription practice and variability among primary healthcare physicians. We excluded editorials, opinions, systematic reviews and studies published in languages other than English. We searched studies from electronic databases: PubMed, ProQuest Health and Medicine, Web Science, and Scopus. The quality of the included studies was appraised using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (Version 2018). Narrative synthesis was employed to synthesize the result and incorporate quantitative studies.

RESULTS

Of the 1816 identified studies, 49 studies spanning 2000-2023 were eligible for review. The factors influencing antibiotic prescription practice and variability were grouped into physician-related, patient-related, and healthcare system-related factors. Clinical guidelines, previous patient experience, physician experience, colleagues' prescribing practice, pharmaceutical pressure, time pressure, and financial considerations were found to be influencing factors of antibiotic prescribing practice. In addition, individual practice patterns, practice volume, and relationship with patients were also other factors for the variability of antibiotic prescription, especially for intra-physician prescription variability.

CONCLUSION

Antibiotic prescription practice in primary health care is a complex practice, influenced by a combination of different factors and this may account for the variation. To address the factors that influence the variability of antibiotic prescription (intra- and inter-physician), interventions should aim to reduce diagnostic uncertainty and provide continuous medical education and training to promote patient-centred care.

What works for and what hinders deimplementation of low-value care in emergency medicine practice? A scoping review

OBJECTIVES

Low-value care can harm patients and healthcare systems. Despite a decade of global endeavours, low value care has persisted. Identification of barriers and enablers is essential for effective deimplementation of low-value care. This scoping review is an evidence summary of barriers, enablers and features of effective interventions for deimplementation of low-value care in emergency medicine practice worldwide.

DESIGN

A mixed-methods scoping review was conducted using the Arksey and O'Malley framework.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, CINAHL, Embase, EMCare, Scopus and grey literature were searched from inception to 5 December 2022.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Primary studies which employed qualitative, quantitative or mixed-methods approaches to explore deimplementation of low-value care in an EM setting and reported barriers, enablers or interventions were included. Reviews, protocols, perspectives, comments, opinions, editorials, letters to editors, news articles, books, chapters, policies, guidelines and animal studies were excluded. No language limits were applied.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Study selection, data collection and quality assessment were performed by two independent reviewers. Barriers, enablers and interventions were mapped to the domains of the Theoretical Domains Framework. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool was used for quality assessment.

RESULTS

The search yielded 167 studies. A majority were quantitative studies (90%, 150/167) that evaluated interventions (86%, 143/167). Limited provider abilities, diagnostic uncertainty, lack of provider insight, time constraints, fear of litigation, and patient expectations were the key barriers. Enablers included leadership commitment, provider engagement, provider training, performance feedback to providers and shared decision-making with patients. Interventions included one or more of the following facets: education, stakeholder engagement, audit and feedback, clinical decision support, nudge, clinical champions and training. Multifaceted interventions were more likely to be effective than single-faceted interventions. Effectiveness of multifaceted interventions was influenced by fidelity of the intervention facets. Use of behavioural change theories such as the Theoretical Domains Framework in the published studies appeared to enhance the effectiveness of interventions to deimplement low-value care.

CONCLUSION

High-fidelity, multifaceted interventions that incorporated education, stakeholder engagement, audit/feedback and clinical decision support, were administered daily and lasted longer than 1 year were most effective in achieving deimplementation of low-value care in emergency departments. This review contributes the best available evidence to date, but further rigorous, theory-informed, qualitative and mixed-methods studies are needed to supplement the growing body of evidence to effectively deimplement low-value care in emergency medicine practice.

A scoping review and behavioural analysis of factors underlying overuse of antimicrobials

Background

Overuse of antimicrobials is a challenging global issue that contributes to antimicrobial resistance. Despite widespread awareness of the problem among members of the medical community and various attempts to improve prescription practices, existing antimicrobial stewardship programmes are not always effective. In our view, this may reflect limited understanding of factors that influence prescription of antimicrobials as empirical therapy, implying a need to address the psychological mechanisms behind some of the specific behaviours involved.

Objectives

To identify factors that influence the antimicrobials prescription as empirical therapy, and to relate these factors to findings from behavioural science.

Methods

We conducted a scoping review of the literature on the factors underlying antimicrobial prescription decisions, following the protocol designed using PRISMA guidelines.

Results and conclusions

From a final sample of 90 sources, we identified ten factors important in antimicrobial prescription decisions. In the second stage of our analysis, we grouped them into five final categories: (1) nature of the decision, (2) social influences, (3) individual differences, (4) characteristics of the patient, (5) context. We analyse these categories using a behavioural science perspective.

A multi-institutional exploration of emergency medicine physicians' attitudes and behaviours on antibiotic use during the COVID-19 pandemic: a mixed-methods study

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has changed the epidemiology of upper respiratory tract infections (URTI) and the disease profile of patients attending the emergency department (ED). Hence, we sought to explore the changes in ED physicians' attitudes and behaviours in four EDs in Singapore.

METHODS

We employed a sequential mixed-methods approach (quantitative survey followed by in-depth interviews). Principal component analysis was performed to derive latent factors, followed by multivariable logistic regression to explore the independent factors associated with high antibiotic prescribing. Interviews were analysed using the deductive-inductive-deductive framework. We derive five meta-inferences by integrating the quantitative and qualitative findings with an explanatory bidirectional framework.

RESULTS

We obtained 560 (65.9%) valid responses from the survey and interviewed 50 physicians from various work experiences. ED physicians were twice as likely to report high antibiotic prescribing rates pre-COVID-19 pandemic than during the pandemic (AOR = 2.12, 95% CI 1.32 to 3.41, p = 0.002). Five meta-inferences were made by integrating the data: (1) Less pressure to prescribe antibiotics due to reduced patient demand and more patient education opportunities; (2) A higher proportion of ED physicians self-reported lower antibiotic prescribing rates during the COVID-19 pandemic but their perception of the overall outlook on antibiotic prescribing rates varied; (3) Physicians who were high antibiotic prescribers during the COVID-19 pandemic made less effort for prudent antibiotic prescribing as they were less concerned about antimicrobial resistance; (4) the COVID-19 pandemic did not change the factors that lowered the threshold for antibiotic prescribing; (5) the COVID-19 pandemic did not change the perception that the public's knowledge of antibiotics is poor.

CONCLUSIONS

Self-reported antibiotic prescribing rates decreased in the ED during the COVID-19 pandemic due to less pressure to prescribe antibiotics. The lessons and experiences learnt from the COVID-19 pandemic can be incorporated into public and medical education in the war against antimicrobial resistance going forward. Antibiotic use should also be monitored post-pandemic to assess if the changes are sustained.

Evaluation of Medication Errors in a Tertiary Care Hospital of a Low- to Middle-Income Country

Introduction Medication errors (MEs) are a major public health concern as they are detrimental to patient safety, compromise patients' confidence in the healthcare system, increase healthcare costs, and adversely affect the patient's quality of life. This is especially true in low to middle-income countries where the significance of MEs is largely undervalued. This study aims to investigate the prevalence of MEs and analyze the causes, medicines involved, reporting, and severity of MEs in a tertiary care setting. Methods A prospective observational study was conducted from March 2020 to February 2021 in a tertiary care teaching hospital in South India. The data was collected after reviewing patient medical records, by interviewing patients and healthcare professionals. National Coordinating Council for Medication Error Reporting and Prevention (NCC MERP) index was used to evaluate MEs. Results A total of 557 MEs were identified from 3798 patients with a prevalence of 14.6%. Prescribing errors were the most commonly observed ME followed by errors related to documentation of medical records, administration-related errors, and dispensing errors. Lack of time for documentation of medication records, shift change and work overload were common causes of MEs. The majority of MEs were category A and B of the NCC MERP severity index. Conclusion Antibiotics and proton pump inhibitors were the most common medicines involved in MEs. Prescribing and documentation errors were most prevalent. Implementation of systems like strict adherence to treatment guidelines, computerized provider order entry (CPOE), barcode medication administration, and closed-loop electronic medication management systems may greatly help reduce MEs. All healthcare institutions should undertake routine audits to determine the prevalence and causes of medication errors.