Paediatric Prescription Analysis in a Primary Health Care Institution

Prevalence of antibiotics prescription amongst patients with and without COVID-19 in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) poses a substantial risk to public health. In low-income and middle-income (LMICs) nations, the impact of AMR is significantly more severe. The absence of data from low-income countries (LMICs) causes this topic to be frequently overlooked. Additionally, the COVID-19 pandemic could make the AMR issue even worse. Earlier guidelines recommended antibiotic use in patients with COVID-19, even in those without bacterial coinfection. This study aims to investigate the proportion of antibiotic prescriptions in LMICs among patients with and without coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), the proportion of inappropriate antibiotics, and multi-antibiotic prescribing. We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA). We retrieved data through online databases, including PubMed, Scopus, and ScienceDirect. Amongst COVID-19 patients, the meta-analytic estimate of antibiotic prescription was 0.80 (95% CI: 0.72-0.88), whereas antibiotic use among patients with non-COVID-19 infections was 0.54 (95% CI: 0.49-0.58). Half of those prescribed antibiotics (0.52, 95% CI: 0.32-0.72) are inappropriate prescriptions. In addition, we found that one-third of antibiotics prescriptions consisted of more than one antibiotic (0.32, 95% CI: 0.21-0.43). In conclusion, antibiotics are highly prescribed across LMICs, and their use is increased in patients with COVID-19. Amongst those prescriptions, inappropriate and multiple use was not uncommon. This study has several limitations, as it included two studies in an ambulatory setting, and some of the studies included in the analysis were conducted on a small scale. Nevertheless, our findings suggest that urgent action to improve prescribing practices is essential.

Evaluation of Drug Use Pattern in Pediatric Outpatient Clinics in a Tertiary Teaching Hospital Using WHO Drug-Prescribing Indicators

Purpose

The main aim of the study is to assess physicians’ prescribing patterns using the World Health Organization (WHO) prescribing indicators among pediatric outpatient clinics, and to identify areas in need of intervention regarding the rational use of medicines among pediatric outpatients in Jordan.

Methods

This is a descriptive observational cross-sectional study that was conducted at the outpatient pediatric clinics at Jordan University Hospital (JUH). During the study period, prescriptions were collected over a period of two months. Prescribing patterns were assessed using the five WHO drug prescribing indicators.

Results

A total of 1011 prescriptions/encounters were assessed. More than half of the encounters were for male patients (n= 595, 58.9%), and the median age of patients was eight years (IQR = 7.9). The average number of drugs prescribed per encounter was 1.8 ± 1.3; however, a specific individual clinic, the respiratory clinic, witnessed an average of 2.1 drugs prescribed per encounter. All of the prescribed drugs were prescribed by generic name (100%). Only 47.7% of the drugs were from the essential drug list of the JUH. Overall, antibiotics were prescribed in 19.5% of the encounters, but at higher rates in some clinics such as respiratory clinics (50.8%). Injectables were prescribed in 9.5% of the 1011 encounters; however, they were prescribed at higher rates in endocrinology and neurology clinics, in 44.8% and 31.3% of encounters, respectively.

Conclusion

This study revealed some adequate prescribing habits with an optimal prescribing pattern of generics and number of drugs per encounter among pediatric patients. However, the prescribing patterns of the essential drug list, antibiotics, and injectables, in specific clinics, failed to meet WHO standards. The findings of this study shed light on the need to establish national strategies to improve prescribing practices among the pediatric population.

Evaluation of Prescribing Indicators in a Paediatric Population Seen in an Outpatient Consultation at the Gaspard Kamara Health Centre in 2019 (Senegal)

Introduction: Data on drug use in paediatrics are scarce in Senegal. The objective of this study was to assess the prescribing indicators in a paediatric population seen in an outpatient consultation at a Health Centre in Dakar, Senegal. Methods: A retrospective and analytical study was conducted. The study population consisted of prescriptions for children aged 0 to 14 years who were seen in ambulatory consultation between 1 June and 30 November 2019. The sample size was 600 prescriptions. The systematic survey was then conducted. Five prescription indicators recommended by the World Health Organization were calculated. The R software was used for descriptive analysis, bivariate analysis and binomial logistic regression. Results: The average number of drugs per prescription was 2.56. The proportion of drugs prescribed under the International Nonproprietary Name (INN) was 18.9%, while the proportion of drugs on the National Essential Medicines List (NEML) was 41.3%. The proportions of prescriptions with at least one antibiotic and one injectable product were 41.5% and 1.3%, respectively. Conclusions: This study showed that prescribing habits were inadequate. Thus, it would be necessary to move towards continuing training of prescribers in the wise use of medicines.

Non-antibiotic medication use in an Indonesian community cohort 0-18 months of age

BACKGROUND

Rational medication use for treatment is mandatory, particularly in children as they are vulnerable to possible hazards of drugs. Understanding the medication use pattern is of importance to identify the problems of drug therapy and to improve the appropriate use of medication among this population.

METHODS

A post-hoc study of the RV3-BB Phase IIb trial to children aged 0-18 months which was conducted in Indonesia during January 2013 to July 2016. Any concomitant medication use and health events among 1621 trial participants during the 18 months of follow-up were documented. Information on medication use included the frequency, formulation, indication, duration of usage, number of regimens, medication types, and therapeutic classes.

RESULTS

The majority of participants (N = 1333/1621; 82.2%) used at least one non-antibiotic medication for treatment during the 18-month observation period. A total of 7586 medication uses were recorded, mostly in oral formulation (90.5%). Of all illnesses recorded, 24.7% were treated with a single drug regimen of non-antibiotic medication. The most common therapeutic classes used were analgesics/antipyretics (30.1%), antihistamines for systemic use (17.4%), cough and cold preparations (13.5%), vitamins (8.6%), and antidiarrheals (6.6%). The main medication types used were paracetamol (29.9%), chlorpheniramine (16.8%), guaifenesin (8.9%), zinc (4.6%), and ambroxol (4.1%). Respiratory system disorder was the most common reason for medication use (51.9%), followed by gastrointestinal disorders (19.2%), pyrexia (16.9%), and skin disorders (7.0%).

CONCLUSION

A large number of children were exposed to at least one medication during their early life, including those where evidence of efficacy and safety in a pediatric population is lacking. This supports the need for further research on pediatric drug therapy to improve the appropriate use of medication in this population.

Antibiotic prescription practices in primary care in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The widespread use of antibiotics plays a major role in the development and spread of antimicrobial resistance. However, important knowledge gaps still exist regarding the extent of their use in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), particularly at the primary care level. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies conducted in primary care in LMICs to estimate the prevalence of antibiotic prescriptions as well as the proportion of such prescriptions that are inappropriate.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

We searched PubMed, Embase, Global Health, and CENTRAL for articles published between 1 January 2010 and 4 April 2019 without language restrictions. We subsequently updated our search on PubMed only to capture publications up to 11 March 2020. Studies conducted in LMICs (defined as per the World Bank criteria) reporting data on medicine use in primary care were included. Three reviewers independently screened citations by title and abstract, whereas the full-text evaluation of all selected records was performed by 2 reviewers, who also conducted data extraction and quality assessment. A modified version of a tool developed by Hoy and colleagues was utilized to evaluate the risk of bias of each included study. Meta-analyses using random-effects models were performed to identify the proportion of patients receiving antibiotics. The WHO Access, Watch, and Reserve (AWaRe) framework was used to classify prescribed antibiotics. We identified 48 studies from 27 LMICs, mostly conducted in the public sector and in urban areas, and predominantly based on medical records abstraction and/or drug prescription audits. The pooled prevalence proportion of antibiotic prescribing was 52% (95% CI: 51%-53%), with a prediction interval of 44%-60%. Individual studies' estimates were consistent across settings. Only 9 studies assessed rationality, and the proportion of inappropriate prescription among patients with various conditions ranged from 8% to 100%. Among 16 studies in 15 countries that reported details on prescribed antibiotics, Access-group antibiotics accounted for more than 60% of the total in 12 countries. The interpretation of pooled estimates is limited by the considerable between-study heterogeneity. Also, most of the available studies suffer from methodological issues and report insufficient details to assess appropriateness of prescription.

CONCLUSIONS

Antibiotics are highly prescribed in primary care across LMICs. Although a subset of studies reported a high proportion of inappropriate use, the true extent could not be assessed due to methodological limitations. Yet, our findings highlight the need for urgent action to improve prescription practices, starting from the integration of WHO treatment recommendations and the AWaRe classification into national guidelines.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO registration number: CRD42019123269.