Operationalising outpatient antimicrobial stewardship to reduce system-wide antibiotics for acute bronchitis

Evaluation of Multisite Programmatic Bundle to Reduce Unnecessary Antibiotic Prescribing for Respiratory Infections: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Background

The aim of this study was to evaluate the frequency of unnecessary antibiotic prescribing for Tier 3 upper respiratory infection (URI) syndromes across the Mayo Clinic Enterprise before and after a multifaceted antimicrobial stewardship intervention, and to determine ongoing factors associated with antibiotic prescribing and repeat respiratory healthcare contact in the postintervention period.

Methods

This was a quasi-experimental, pre/post, retrospective cohort study from 1 January 2019 through 31 December 2022, with 12-month washout during implementation from 1 July 2020 through 30 June 2021. All outpatient encounters, adult and pediatric, from primary care, urgent care, and emergency medicine specialties with a Tier 3 URI diagnosis were included. The intervention was a multifaceted outpatient antibiotic stewardship bundle. The primary outcome was the rate of antibiotic prescribing in Tier 3 encounters. Secondary outcomes included 14-day repeat healthcare contact for respiratory indications and factors associated with persistent unnecessary prescribing.

Results

A total of 165 658 Tier 3 encounters, 96 125 in the preintervention and 69 533 in the postintervention period, were included. Following intervention, the prescribing rate for Tier 3 encounters decreased from 21.7% to 11.2% (P < .001). Repeat 14-day respiratory healthcare contact in the no antibiotic group was lower postintervention (9.9.% vs 9.4%; P = .004). Multivariable models indicated that increasing patient age, Charlson comorbidity index, and primary diagnosis selected were the most important factors associated with persistent unnecessary antibiotic prescribing.

Conclusions

Outpatient antibiotic stewardship initiatives can reduce unnecessary antibiotic prescribing for Tier 3 URIs without increasing repeat respiratory healthcare contact. Advancing age and number of comorbidities remain risk factors for persistent unnecessary antibiotic prescribing.

Effects of social norm feedback on antibiotic prescribing and its characteristics in behaviour change techniques: a mixed-methods systematic review

Low-cost and low-barrier antibiotic stewardship strategies are urgently needed to deal with the widespread problem of antibiotic resistance. Social norm feedback could be a promising strategy. In this mixed-methods systematic review (PROSPERO: CRD42022361039), we aimed to identify the key behaviour change techniques used in social norm feedback for antibiotic stewardship and assess their effectiveness in reducing antibiotic prescribing. We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus for peer-reviewed studies published between Jan 1, 2000, and Jan 20, 2022. 3547 studies were screened, of which 23 studies reporting the effects of social norm feedback interventions on antibiotic prescribing met the inclusion criteria. 19 behaviour change techniques were tested in the included studies. The meta-analyses showed that social norm feedback is an effective strategy for reducing antibiotic prescribing, with an overall rate difference of 4% (p<0·0001). The behaviour change technique with the highest effective ratio (ER=13) was information about health consequences, followed by instruction on how to perform the behaviour (ER=9) and adding objects to the environment (ER=9). Social norm feedback is a promising strategy to reduce antibiotic prescribing, and can be incorporated into the clinical decision-making support system.

It's about the patients: Practical antibiotic stewardship in outpatient settings in the United States

Antibiotic-resistant pathogens cause over 35,000 preventable deaths in the United States every year, and multiple strategies could decrease morbidity and mortality. As antibiotic stewardship requirements are being deployed for the outpatient setting, community providers are facing systematic challenges in implementing stewardship programs. Given that the vast majority of antibiotics are prescribed in the outpatient setting, there are endless opportunities to make a smart and informed choice when prescribing and to move the needle on antibiotic stewardship. Antibiotic stewardship in the community, or "smart prescribing" as we suggest, should factor in antibiotic efficacy, safety, local resistance rates, and overall cost, in addition to patient-specific factors and disease presentation, to arrive at an appropriate therapy. Here, we discuss some of the challenges, such as patient/parent pressure to prescribe, lack of data or resources for implementation, and a disconnect between guidelines and real-world practice, among others. We have assembled an easy-to-use best practice guide for providers in the outpatient setting who lack the time or resources to develop a plan or consult lengthy guidelines. We provide specific suggestions for antibiotic prescribing that align real-world clinical practice with best practices for antibiotic stewardship for two of the most common bacterial infections seen in the outpatient setting: community-acquired pneumonia and skin and soft-tissue infection. In addition, we discuss many ways that community providers, payors, and regulatory bodies can make antibiotic stewardship easier to implement and more streamlined in the outpatient setting.

Association of antibiotics with veteran visit satisfaction and antibiotic expectations for upper respiratory tract infections

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Veterans' Affairs (VA) healthcare providers perceive that Veterans expect and base visit satisfaction on receiving antibiotics for upper respiratory tract infections (URIs). No studies have tested this hypothesis. We sought to determine whether receiving and/or expecting antibiotics were associated with Veteran satisfaction with URI visits.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study included Veterans evaluated for URI January 2018-December 2019 in an 18-clinic ambulatory VA primary-care system. We evaluated Veteran satisfaction via the Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire Short Form (RAND Corporation), an 18-item 5-point Likert scale survey. Additional items assessed Veteran antibiotic expectations. Antibiotic receipt was determined via medical record review. We used multivariable regression to evaluate whether antibiotic receipt and/or Veteran antibiotic expectations were associated with satisfaction. Subgroup analyses focused on Veterans who accurately remembered antibiotic prescribing during their URI visit.

RESULTS

Of 1,329 eligible Veterans, 432 (33%) participated. Antibiotic receipt was not associated with differences in mean total satisfaction (adjusted score difference, 0.6 points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -2.1 to 3.3). However, mean total satisfaction was lower for Veterans expecting an antibiotic (adjusted score difference -4.4 points; 95% CI -7.2 to -1.6). Among Veterans who accurately remembered the visit and did not receive an antibiotic, those who expected an antibiotic had lower mean satisfaction scores than those who did not (unadjusted score difference, -16.6 points; 95% CI, -24.6 to -8.6).

CONCLUSIONS

Veteran expectations for antibiotics, not antibiotic receipt, are associated with changes in satisfaction with outpatient URI visits. Future research should further explore patient expectations and development of patient-centered and provider-focused interventions to change patient antibiotic expectations.

Antimicrobial stewardship in wound care implementation and measuring outcomes: results of an e-survey

OBJECTIVE

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) occurs (as a result of misuse, such as over-prescribing) when certain pathogens fail to respond to treatment with antimicrobials. Consequently, patients can become severely ill and possibly die. A strategy referred to as antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) has been introduced which reduces the impact of this antimicrobial misuse. To explore health professionals' (working in wound care, treating both acute and hard-to-heal wounds) position in terms of the following: awareness of AMS; if they are aware of AMS, if they implement procedures to support its practice; and if they implement AMS, do they measure its impact by and compare pre- and post-implementation?

METHOD

An e-survey designed to explore health professionals' awareness of AMS and its implications for wound care.

RESULTS

There were 987 respondents to the survey. The majority were specialist wound care nurses, mainly based in the UK or the US and Canada. A high proportion of those surveyed were completely/partially aware (35.1/57.9%, respectively) of AMS, and almost all implemented strategies to reduce antimicrobial prescribing. Of those surveyed, 36% took steps to measure the impact of AMS, and as a result 35.2% reported positive impacts (for example, cost reductions, a reduction in the systemic use of antimicrobials, a reduction in the topical use of antimicrobials and a reduced level of antimicrobial-resistant microorganisms). Challenging aspects of AMS implementation were reported by 33.2% of respondents (for example, poorer clinical outcomes in terms of healing and increased costs). The data highlighted that 40.49% felt that AMS would be 'easy' or 'very easy' to implement while 21.73% felt that AMS would be 'difficult' or 'very difficult' to implement.

CONCLUSION

Education strategies need to be devised to raise awareness and support health professionals, including wound care practitioners, to understand and implement effective AMS programmes. Development of clear metrics is required to evaluate the effect of AMS programmes in clinical practice.