"What they see is what you get": Prescribing antibiotics for respiratory tract infections in primary care: Do high prescribers diagnose differently? An analysis of German routine data

Factors influencing antibiotic prescribing for respiratory tract infections in primary care - a comparison of physicians with different antibiotic prescribing rates

BACKGROUND

There has been a notable decrease in antibiotic prescribing in the last thirty years in Sweden. Little is known about factors influencing antibiotic prescribing over several years.

OBJECTIVE

To compare primary care physicians who, over time, reduced their antibiotic prescribing for respiratory tract infections with those who remained either high or low prescribers regarding potentially influencing factors.

DESIGN AND SETTING

A register-based study including all RTI visits in primary care in Region Kronoberg, Sweden 2006-2014. The data were divided into three 3-year periods.

SUBJECTS

The data comprised all physicians who had diagnosed at least one RTI for each of the three-year periods. The antibiotic prescribing rate adjusted for the patients' sex and age group was calculated for each physician and period, and based on the change between the first and the third period, the physicians were divided into three prescriber groups: The High Prescribing Group, the Decreasing Prescribing Group, and the Low Prescribing Group.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

For the three prescriber groups, we compared factors influencing antibiotic prescribing such as the characteristics of the physicians, their use of point-of-care tests, their choice of diagnoses, and whether the patients returned and received antibiotics.

RESULTS

The High Prescribing Group ordered more point-of-care tests, registered more potential bacterial diagnoses, prescribed antibiotics at lower C-reactive protein levels, and prescribed antibiotics more often despite negative group A Streptococci test than in the Low Prescribing Group. The Decreasing Prescribing Group was between the High Prescribing Group and the Low Prescribing Group regarding these variables. The lower prescription rate in the Low Prescribing Group did not result in more return visits or new antibiotic prescriptions within 30 days.

CONCLUSION

Point-of-care testing and its interpretation differed between the prescriber groups. Focus on interpreting point-of-care test results could be a way forward in antibiotic stewardship.

Point-of-care testing and antibiotics prescribing in out-of-hours general practice: a register-based study in Denmark

BACKGROUND

Point-of-care testing may reduce diagnostic uncertainty in case of suspicion of bacterial infection, thereby contributing to prudent antibiotic prescribing. We aimed to study variations in the use of point-of-care tests (C-reactive protein test, rapid streptococcal antigen detection test, and urine dipstick) among general practitioners (GPs) and the potential association between point-of-care testing and antibiotic prescribing in out-of-hours general practice.

METHODS

We conducted a population-based observational register-based study, based on patient contacts with out-of-hours general practice in the Central Denmark Region in 2014-2017. The tendency of GPs to use point-of-care testing was calculated, and the association between the use of point-of-care testing and antibiotic prescribing was evaluated with the use of binomial regression.

RESULTS

Out-of-hours general practice conducted 794,220 clinic consultations from 2014 to 2017, of which 16.1% resulted in an antibiotic prescription. The GP variation in the use of point-of-care testing was largest for C-reactive protein tests, with an observed variation (p90/p10 ratio) of 3.0; this means that the GPs in the 90th percentile used C-reactive protein tests three times as often as the GPs in the 10th percentile. The observed variation was 2.1 for rapid streptococcal antigen detection tests and 1.9 for urine dipsticks. The GPs who tended to use more point-of-care tests prescribed significantly more antibiotics than the GPs who tended to use fewer point-of-care tests. The GPs in the upper quintile of the tendency to use C-reactive protein test prescribed 22% more antibiotics than the GPs in the lowest quintile (21% for rapid streptococcal antigen detection tests and 8% for urine dipsticks). Up through the quintiles, this effect exhibited a positive linear dose-response correlation.

CONCLUSION

The GPs varied in use of point-of-care testing. The GPs who tended to perform more point-of-care testing prescribed more antibiotics compared with the GPs who tended to perform fewer of these tests.

Medicalising diagnoses and treatment preferences: a retrospective cohort study of throat-related consultations in electronic primary care records

BACKGROUND

Rather than first diagnosing and then deciding on treatment, GPs may intuitively decide on treatment and justify this through choice of diagnosis.

AIM

To investigate the relationship between choice of a medicalising diagnosis and antibiotic treatment for throat-related consultations.

DESIGN & SETTING

A retrospective cohort study in a large database of UK electronic primary care records between 1 January 2010 and 1 January 2020.

METHOD

All first throat-related consultations were included, categorised as either pharyngitis/tonsillitis or sore throat. The outcome was any antibiotic prescription on the consultation date. GP-level random effects on prescribing and on diagnosis were estimated in a series of mixed-effects regression models, including age, sex, weekday, month, and clinician characteristics as fixed effects. GPs were grouped into quintiles by antibiotic prescribing propensity, and described the proportion of patients they diagnosed with pharyngitis/tonsillitis or sore throat in each quintile.

RESULTS

The analysis dataset included 393 590 throat-related consultations with 6881 staff. Diagnosis of pharyngitis/tonsillitis was strongly associated with antibiotic prescribing (adjusted odds ratio = 13.41, 95% confidence interval = 12.8 to 14.04). GP random effect accounted for 18% of variation in prescribing and for 26% of variation in diagnosis. GPs in the lowest quintile of antibiotic prescribing propensity diagnosed pharyngitis/tonsillitis on 31% of occasions, compared with 55% in the highest quintile.

CONCLUSION

There is substantial variation among GPs in diagnosis and treatment of throat-related problems. Preference for a medicalising diagnosis is associated with a preference for antibiotics, suggesting a common propensity to both diagnose and treat.

Promoting rational antibiotic therapy among high antibiotic prescribers in German primary care-study protocol of the ElektRA 4-arm cluster-randomized controlled trial

Background

The rational use of antibiotics is of great importance in health care. In primary care, acute respiratory infections are the most common cause of inappropriate antibiotic prescribing. Since existing studies aiming to optimize antibiotic use are usually based on the voluntary participation of physicians, general practitioners (GPs) with inappropriate prescribing behavior are underrepresented. For the first time in Germany, the ElektRA study will assess and compare the effects of three interventions on antibiotic prescribing rates for respiratory and urinary tract infections among high prescribers in primary care.

Method

ElektRA is a 4-arm cluster-randomized controlled trial among German GPs in nine regional Associations of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians. On their behalf, the Central Research Institute of Ambulatory Health Care in Germany (Zi) analyses all outpatient claims and prescription data. Based on this database, high antibiotic prescribing GPs are identified and randomized into four groups: a control group (N=2000) and three intervention arms. We test social norm feedback on antibiotic prescribing (N=2000), social norm feedback plus online training on rational prescribing practice and communication strategies (N=2000), and social norm feedback plus online peer-moderated training on rational antibiotic prescribing, communication strategies, and sustainable behavior change (N=1250). The primary outcome is the overall rate of antibiotic prescriptions. Outcomes are measured before intervention (T0, October 2020–September 2022) and over a period of 15 months (T1, October 2022 to December 2023) after randomization.

Discussion

The aim of the study is to implement individualized, low-threshold interventions to reduce antibiotic prescribing among high prescribers in primary care. If successful, a change in behavior among otherwise difficult-to-reach high prescribers will directly improve patient care. The increase in quality of care will ideally be achieved both in terms of the quantity of antibiotics used as well as the kind of substances prescribed. Also, if effective strategies for high prescribers are identified through this study, they can be applied not only to the antibiotics addressed in this study, but also to other areas of prescription management.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN95468513.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13012-022-01241-4.

Assessing Reduction of Antibiotic Prescribing for Acute, Non-Complicated Infections in Primary Care in Germany: Multi-Step Outcome Evaluation in the Cluster-Randomized Trial ARena

The three-armed cluster-randomized trial ARena (sustainable reduction of antibiotic-induced antimicrobial resistance) aimed to foster appropriate antibiotic use and reduce overprescribing in German ambulatory care to counter antibiotic resistance. Multi-faceted interventions targeted primary care physicians, teams and patients. This study examined the effectiveness of the implementation program. ARena was conducted in 14 primary care networks with 196 practices. All arms received data-based feedback on antibiotics prescribing and quality circles. Arms II and III received different add-on components each. Primary outcome examined is the prescribing rate for systemic antibiotics for cases with non-complicated acute infections (upper respiratory tract, bronchitis, sinusitis, tonsillitis, otitis media). Secondary outcomes refer to the prescribing of quinolones and guideline-recommended antibiotics. Based on pseudonymized quarterly claims data, mixed logistic regression models examined pre-post intervention antibiotic prescribing rate changes and compared to matched standard care. A significant rate reduction (arm I 11.7%; arm II 9.9%; arm III 12.7%) and significantly lower prescribing rates were observed for all arms (20.1%, 18.9% and 23.6%) compared to matched standard care (29.4%). Fluoroquinolone prescribing was reduced in all intervention arms and rates for recommended substances generally increased. No significant post-interventional difference between intervention arms was detected. Findings indicate implementation program impact compared to standard care.

A Choosing Wisely top-5 list to support general practitioners in Austria

From a pool of 147 reliable recommendations, ten experts from the Austrian Society of General Practice and Family Medicine selected 21 relevant recommendations as the basis for the Delphi process. In two Delphi rounds, eleven experts established a top‑5 list of recommendations designed for Austrian family practice to reduce medical overuse. Three of the chosen recommendations address the issue of antibiotic usage in patients with viral upper respiratory tract infections, in children with mild otitis media, and in patients with asymptomatic bacteriuria. The other two “do not do” recommendations concern imaging studies for nonspecific low back pain and routine screening to detect prostate cancer. A subsequent survey identified the reasons for selecting these top‑5 recommendations: the frequency of the issue, potential harms, costs, and patients’ expectations. Experts hope the campaign will save time in educating patients and provide legal protection for omitting measures.

Evaluation of a multimodal intervention to promote rational antibiotic use in primary care

Background

Increasing antimicrobial resistance is a serious societal challenge affecting outpatient, inpatient and veterinary care. The German One-Health project, RAI (Rational use of Antibiotics via Information and Communication) addresses all three sectors. In the outpatient sector, General Practitioners (GPs) are the main prescribers of antibiotics and were therefore, targeted for this study. A multimodal intervention focusing on Acute Respiratory Tract infections (ARI) was designed and implemented. The aim of this study was to evaluate acceptance, rating and the self-reported impact of the intervention among GPs.

Methods

The intervention offered six tools: a GP training on rational antibiotic use, an app for self-monitoring, a leaflet and a set of posters (both for use as information materials in waiting rooms) and both digital and printed information prescriptions (material for ‘prescribing’ information instead of an antibiotic to the patient). The tools could be used according to individual preferences. The intervention was conducted between August 2016 and July 2017. Following the intervention, a three pages anonymous questionnaire was sent to all 271 participants. Items covered socio-demographic and professional background, use and judgement of the intervention tools (6 point Likert scale), impact of the intervention tools (4 point Likert scale).

Results

The response rate was 39% (n = 107). On average, respondents used 3.1 of the six available tools, with printed information prescriptions used most frequently (79%). Digital information prescriptions were used more frequently by men than by women (OR 2.8; 95% CI 1.16–7.24; p = 0.02). Eighty-seven percent of respondents stated that information prescriptions supported doctor-patient communication. In a comparison of the overall impression of the different intervention tools the GP training on rational antibiotic use was rated best (1.67 on a 6 point scale with 1 = highest, 6 = lowest) and most often noted as having had a “strong” or “very strong” impact on personal antibiotic prescribing behavior.

Conclusions

The multimodal intervention addressing education and communication was well accepted among GPs and could help in fostering rational use of antibiotics in primary care.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13756-021-00908-9.

[An online dynamic knowledge base in multiple languages on general medicine and primary care]

INTRODUCTION

The International Classification of Primary Care, Second version (ICPC-2) aligned with the 10th Revision of the International Classification of Disease (ICD-10) is a standard for primary care epidemiology compendium. ICPC-2 has been also intended to identify the clinical topics in family medicine. Contextual field-specific knowledge in family medicine and primary care such as health structures, management, categories of patients, research methods, ethical or environmental features are not standardized and reflect, more often, the views of experts.

METHODS

A qualitative research method, applied to the analysis of several Family Medicine congresses, has helped identify, in addition to clinical items, a spectrum of contextual concepts addressed by family doctors during their exchanges at the congresses. Assembled in a hierarchical manner, these concepts were given expression, together with ICPC-2, under the name of Q-codes Version 2.5, in the multilingual multi-terminology semantic server of the Department of Information and medical informatics (D2Im) at the University of Rouen, France. The two classifications are edited under the acronym 3 CGP for Core Content classification of General Practice. This free access server allows you to consult the ICPC-2 in 22 languages and the Q-codes in ten languages.

RESULTS

The result of the joint use of these two classifications, as descriptors in congress to identify the concepts in texts or index the gray literature for family medicine and primary care is presented here in its various pilot uses. The validity and generalizability of 3CGP appears to be good in the light of the translations already carried out by colleagues around the world and of the applicability of the method in the two sides of the Atlantic. However the reproducibility and the inter-coder variations still remain to be tested for Q-codes. Maintenance remains an issue.

CONCLUSION

This method highlights the conceptual extension, the complexity and the dynamics of the role of general practitioner and family doctor as well as of primary care physician.