Low Uptake of Rapid Diagnostic Tests for Respiratory Tract Infections in an Urban Safety Net Hospital

Outpatient Antibiotic and Antiviral Utilization Patterns in Patients Tested for Respiratory Pathogens in the United States: A Real-World Database Study

This retrospective observational study evaluated outpatient treatment patterns among patients with molecular-based viral diagnostic testing for suspected upper respiratory tract infections in the United States. Patients with a respiratory viral test were identified from 1 August 2016 to 1 July 2019 in a large national reference laboratory database linked to IQVIA’s prescription and medical claims databases. Antibiotic and influenza antiviral treatment patterns were reported up to 7 days post-test result. Predictors of antibiotic utilization were assessed using multivariable logistic regression. Among 9561 patients included in the study, 24.6% had evidence of ≥1 filled antibiotic prescription. Antibiotic utilization was higher in patients who tested negative for all viral targets (odds ratio [OR], 1.33; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.17–1.50) and patients positive for non-influenza viruses (OR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.09–1.51) compared with those influenza-positive only. Age ≥ 50 years and location outside of the northeast United States also predicted antibiotic utilization. Influenza antivirals were more common in influenza-positive patients compared with patients with other test results (32.5% vs. 3.6–9.0%). Thus, in this real-world study, antibiotic utilization was elevated in patients positive for non-influenza viruses, although antibiotics would generally not be indicated. Further research on pairing diagnostic tools with outpatient antibiotic stewardship programs is needed.

Provider views on rapid diagnostic tests and antibiotic prescribing for respiratory tract infections: A mixed methods study

BACKGROUND

Respiratory tract infections (RTIs) are often inappropriately treated with antibiotics. Rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) have been developed with the aim of improving antibiotic prescribing but uptake remains low. The aim of this study was to examine provider knowledge, attitudes and behaviors regarding RDT use and their relationship to antibiotic prescribing decisions across multiple clinical departments in an urban safety-net hospital.

METHODS

We conducted a mixed methods sequential explanatory study. Providers with prescribing authority (attending physicians, nurse practitioners and physician assistants) who had at least 20 RTI encounters from January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2018. Eighty-five providers completed surveys and 16 participated in interviews. We conducted electronic surveys via RedCap from April to July 2019, followed by semi-structured individual interviews from October to December 2019, to ascertain knowledge, attitudes and behaviors related to RDT use and antibiotic prescribing.

RESULTS

Survey findings indicated that providers felt knowledgeable about antibiotic prescribing guidelines. They reported high familiarity with the rapid streptococcus and rapid influenza tests. Familiarity with comprehensive respiratory panel PCR (RPP-respiratory panel PCR) and procalcitonin differed by clinical department. Qualitative interviews identified four main themes: providers trust their clinical judgment more than rapid test results; patient-provider relationships play an important role in prescribing decisions; there is patient demand for antibiotics and providers employ different strategies to address the demand and providers do not believe RDTs are implemented with sufficient education or evidence for clinical practice.

CONCLUSION

Prescribers are knowledgeable about prescribing guidelines but often rely on clinical judgement to make final decisions. The utility of RDTs is specific to the type of RDT and the clinical department. Given the low familiarity and clinical utility of RPP and procalcitonin, providers may require additional education and these tests may need to be implemented differently based on clinical department.