scholarly journals Improving antimicrobial prescribing for upper respiratory infections in the emergency department: Implementation of peer comparison with behavioral feedback

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
George F. Jones ◽  
Valeria Fabre ◽  
Jeremiah Hinson ◽  
Scott Levin ◽  
Matthew Toerper ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Health System ◽  
Respiratory Infections ◽  
Inappropriate Prescribing ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Antibiotic Prescribing ◽  
Diagnosis Code ◽  
Respiratory Condition ◽  
Attending Physicians ◽  
Behavioral Feedback

Abstract Objective: To reduce inappropriate antibiotic prescribing for acute respiratory infections (ARIs) by employing peer comparison with behavioral feedback in the emergency department (ED). Design: A controlled before-and-after study. Setting: The study was conducted in 5 adult EDs at teaching and community hospitals in a health system. Patients: Adults presenting to the ED with a respiratory condition diagnosis code. Hospitalized patients and those with a diagnosis code for a non-respiratory condition for which antibiotics are or may be warranted were excluded. Interventions: After a baseline period from January 2016 to March 2018, 3 EDs implemented a feedback intervention with peer comparison between April 2018 and December 2019 for attending physicians. Also, 2 EDs in the health system served as controls. Using interrupted time series analysis, the inappropriate ARI prescribing rate was calculated as the proportion of antibiotic-inappropriate ARI encounters with a prescription. Prescribing rates were also evaluated for all ARIs. Attending physicians at intervention sites received biannual e-mails with their inappropriate prescribing rate and had access to a dashboard that was updated daily showing their performance relative to their peers. Results: Among 28,544 ARI encounters, the inappropriate prescribing rate remained stable at the control EDs between the 2 periods (23.0% and 23.8%). At the intervention sites, the inappropriate prescribing rate decreased significantly from 22.0% to 15.2%. Between periods, the overall ARI prescribing rate was 38.1% and 40.6% in the control group and 35.9% and 30.6% in the intervention group. Conclusions: Behavioral feedback with peer comparison can be implemented effectively in the ED to reduce inappropriate prescribing for ARIs.

scholarly journals 1633. A Multifaceted Intervention to Improve Prescribing for Acute Respiratory Infection in Adults and Children in Emergency Department and Urgent Care Settings (MITIGATE Trial)

2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (suppl_1) ◽  
pp. S43-S43 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kabir Yadav ◽  
Daniella Meeker ◽  
Rakesh Mistry ◽  
Jason Doctor ◽  
Katherine Fleming-Dutra ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Health System ◽  
Respiratory Infection ◽  
Acute Respiratory Infection ◽  
Inappropriate Prescribing ◽  
Antibiotic Use ◽  
Urgent Care ◽  
Antibiotic Prescribing ◽  
Adults And Children ◽  
Specific Implementation

Abstract Background Antibiotics are prescribed in approximately half of emergency department (ED) and urgent care center (UCC) visits for antibiotic inappropriate or presumed viral acute respiratory infection (ARI). Unnecessary antibiotic use increases adverse events, antibiotic resistance, and healthcare costs. Antibiotic stewardship in the ED and UCC requires specific implementation tailored to these unique settings. Objective. To evaluate the comparative effectiveness of patient and provider education adapted for the acute care setting (adapted intervention) to an intervention with behavioral nudges and individual peer comparisons (enhanced intervention), on reducing inappropriate antibiotic use for ARI in EDs and UCCs. Methods Pragmatic, cluster randomized clinical trial conducted in 3 academic health systems (1 pediatric-only, 2 serving adults and children) that included 5 adult and pediatric EDs and 4 UCCs. Sites were block randomized by health system, and providers at each site assigned to receive the adapted or enhanced intervention. Implementation science strategies were employed to tailor interventions at each site. The main outcome was the proportion of antibiotic inappropriate ARI diagnosis visits that received an antibiotic. We estimated a hierarchical mixed effects logistic regression model for visits that occurred between November and February for 2016–2017 (baseline) and 2017–2018 (intervention), controlling for organization and provider fixed effects. Results Across all sites, there were 45,160 ARI visits among 534 providers, with overall antibiotic prescribing at 2.6%; the pediatric-only system had a lower baseline rate (1.6%) compared with the other 2 systems (5.0% and 7.1%), P < 0.001). Despite the unusually low rate, we found a significant reduction in inappropriate prescribing after adjusting for health-system and provider-level effects from 2.6% to 1.4 % (odds ratio 0.52; 0.38–0.72). Reductions in prescribing between the 2 interventions were in the expected direction, but not significantly different (P < 0.062). Conclusion Implementation of antimicrobial stewardship for ARI is feasible and effective in the ED and UCC settings. The enhanced behavioral nudging methods were not more effective in high-performance settings. Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures.

scholarly journals An antibiotic stewardship programme to reduce inappropriate antibiotic prescribing for acute respiratory infections in rural Chinese primary care facilities: study protocol for a clustered randomised controlled trial

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chao Zhuo ◽  
Xiaolin Wei ◽  
Zhitong Zhang ◽  
Joseph Paul Hicks ◽  
Jinkun Zheng ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Antibiotic Stewardship ◽  
Respiratory Infections ◽  
Inappropriate Prescribing ◽  
Antibiotic Prescribing ◽  
Acute Respiratory Infections ◽  
Care Facilities ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
Antibiotic Stewardship Programme

Abstract Background: Inappropriate prescribing of antibiotics for acute respiratory infections at primary care level represents the major source of antibiotic misuse in healthcare, and is a major driver for antimicrobial resistance worldwide. In this study we will develop, pilot and evaluate the effectiveness of a comprehensive antibiotic stewardship programme in China’s primary care hospitals to reduce inappropriate prescribing of antibiotics for acute respiratory infections among all ages.Methods: We will use a parallel-group, cluster-randomised, controlled, superiority trial with blinded outcome evaluation but unblinded treatment (providers and patients). We will randomise 34 primary care hospitals from two counties within Guangdong province into the intervention and control arm (1:1 overall ratio) stratified by county (8:9 within-county ratio). In the control arm, antibiotic prescribing and management will continue through usual care. In the intervention arm, we will implement an antibiotic stewardship programme targeting family physicians and patients/caregivers. The family physician components include: 1) training using new operational guidelines, 2) improved management and peer-review of antibiotic prescribing, 3) improved electronic medical records and smart phone app facilitation. The patient/caregiver component involves patient education via family physicians, leaflets and videos. The primary outcome is the proportion of prescriptions for acute respiratory infections (excluding pneumonia) that contain any antibiotic(s). Secondary outcomes will address how frequently specific classes of antibiotics are prescribed, how frequently key non-antibiotic alternatives are prescribed and the costs of consultations. We will conduct a qualitative process evaluation to explore operational questions regarding acceptability, cultural appropriateness and burden of technology use, as well as a cost-effectiveness analysis and a long-term benefit evaluation. The duration of the intervention will be 12 months, with another 24 months post-trial long-term follow-up.Discussion: Our study is one of the first trials to evaluate the effect of an antibiotic stewardship programme in primary care settings in a low- or middle-income country (LMIC). All intervention activities will be designed to be embedded into routine primary care with strong local ownership. Through the trial we intend to impact on clinical practice and national policy in antibiotic prescription for primary care facilities in rural China and other LMICs.Trial registration: ISRCTN, ISRCTN96892547. Registered 18 August 2019, http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN96892547

Differences in antibiotic prescriptions between direct-to-consumer telehealth and telehealth in the emergency department

2021 ◽  
pp. 1357633X2110349
Author(s):  
Peter Yao ◽  
Kriti Gogia ◽  
Sunday Clark ◽  
Hanson Hsu ◽  
Rahul Sharma ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Confidence Interval ◽  
Respiratory Infection ◽  
Antibiotic Stewardship ◽  
Odds Ratio ◽  
Acute Respiratory Infection ◽  
Respiratory Infections ◽  
Antibiotic Prescribing ◽  
Acute Respiratory Infections ◽  
Direct To Consumer

Background Telemedicine, which allows physicians to assess and treat patients via real-time audiovisual conferencing, is a rapidly growing modality for providing medical care. Antibiotic stewardship is one important measure of care quality, and research on antibiotic prescribing for acute respiratory infections in direct-to-consumer telemedicine has yielded mixed results. We compared antibiotic prescription rates for acute respiratory infections in two groups treated by telemedicine: (1) patients treated via a direct-to-consumer telemedicine application and (2) patients treated via telemedicine while physically inside the emergency department. Methods We included direct-to-consumer telemedicine and emergency department telemedicine visits for patients 18 years and older with physician-coded International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision acute respiratory infection diagnoses between November 2016 and December 2018. Patients in both groups were seen by the same emergency department faculty working dedicated telemedicine shifts. We compared antibiotic prescribing rates for direct-to-consumer telemedicine and emergency department telemedicine visits before and after adjustment for age, sex, and diagnosis. Results We identified a total of 468 acute respiratory infection visits: 191 direct-to-consumer telemedicine visits and 277 emergency department telemedicine visits. Overall, antibiotics were prescribed for 47% of visits (59% of direct-to-consumer telemedicine visits vs 39% of emergency department telemedicine visits; odds ratio 2.23; 95% confidence interval 1.53–3.25; P < 0.001). The difference in antibiotic prescribing rates remained significant after adjustment for age, sex, and diagnosis (odds ratio 2.49; 95% confidence interval 1.65–3.77; P < 0.001). Conclusion Patients seen by the same group of physicians for acute respiratory infection were significantly more likely to be prescribed antibiotics by direct-to-consumer telemedicine care compared with telemedicine care in the emergency department. This work suggests that contextual factors rather than evaluation over video may contribute to differences in antibiotic stewardship for direct-to-consumer telemedicine encounters.

Pharmacist-Driven Implementation of Outpatient Antibiotic Prescribing Algorithms Improves Guideline Adherence in the Emergency Department

2020 ◽  
pp. 089719002093097
Author(s):  
Kristin Stoll ◽  
Erik Feltz ◽  
Steven Ebert
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Guideline Adherence ◽  
Inappropriate Prescribing ◽  
Community Acquired Pneumonia ◽  
Urgent Care ◽  
Antibiotic Prescribing ◽  
Duration Of Therapy ◽  
Tract Infections ◽  
Selection Of

Background: Inappropriate prescribing of antibiotics has been identified as the most important modifiable risk factor for antimicrobial resistance. Objective: The purpose of this project was to improve guideline adherence and promote optimal use of outpatient antibiotics in the emergency department (ED). Methods: Prescribing algorithms for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), skin and soft tissue infections (SSTI), and urinary tract infections (UTI) were developed to integrate clinical practice guideline recommendations with local ED antibiogram data. Outcomes were evaluated through chart review of patients prescribed outpatient antibiotics by ED providers. The primary outcome was adherence to clinical practice guidelines, defined as the selection of an appropriate antibiotic agent, dose, and duration of therapy for each patient discharged. Results: When compared to patients discharged from the ED prior to algorithm implementation (N = 325), the post-implementation group (N = 353) received more antibiotic prescriptions that were completely guideline adherent (61.5% vs 11.7%, P < .00001). Post-implementation discharge orders demonstrated improvement in the selection of an appropriate agent (87.3% vs 45.5%, P < .00001), dose (91.5% vs 77.2%, P < .00001), and duration of therapy (71.1% vs 39.1%, P < .01). Additionally, fluoroquinolone prescribing rates were reduced (2.3% vs 12.3%, P < .00001). A reduction in all-cause 30-day returns to the ED or urgent care was observed (15.3% vs 21.5%, P = .036). Conclusion: Pharmacist-driven implementation of antibiotic prescribing algorithms improved guideline adherence in the outpatient treatment of CAP, SSTI, and UTI.

scholarly journals 1992. Initial Procalcitonin Level and Antibiotic Practice Patterns Among Patients with Acute Respiratory Infections

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. S668-S668
Author(s):  
Jessica K Costales ◽  
Jim H Nomura ◽  
Wen-Ling Joanie. Chung ◽  
Kristen Ironside ◽  
John J Sim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health System ◽  
Real World ◽  
Practice Patterns ◽  
Respiratory Infections ◽  
Antibiotic Use ◽  
Primary Diagnosis ◽  
Chronic Obstructive ◽  
Antibiotic Prescribing ◽  
Acute Respiratory Infections ◽  
Prescribing Practices

Abstract Background The utility of procalcitonin (PCT)-guided algorithms to decrease antibiotic use has been extensively studied in clinical trials. The guidance that PCT provides as it translates into real-world practice is unclear. This study aims to describe real-world antibiotic prescribing practices in relation to PCT in patients admitted to our US-based health system with acute respiratory infections. Methods Retrospective cohort study of 1,606 adults admitted within our US health system from January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2018 with a primary diagnosis of acute upper or lower respiratory infection with at least one PCT measurement. Antibiotic practice patterns were evaluated using pharmacy analytic information and antibiotic status to note antibiotics given prior to and 36 hours after PCT result. Analysis of discordance with initial PCT level was defined as continuing or starting antibiotics after a low PCT level (PCT ≤0.25 μg/L) and withholding or discontinuing antibiotics after a high PCT level (PCT > 0.25 μg/L). Results Antibiotic prescription patterns after the result of initial PCT level are summarized in Table 1. Only 242 patients (15%) had more than one PCT-level checked. Overall, antibiotic discordance with initial PCT result was 45%; mostly attributed to continuing or starting antibiotics despite a low PCT level (77%). (Figure 1) There were 496 patients who were initially started and continued on antibiotics despite a low PCT result. Of this subgroup, only one patient had a serial PCT measured, and 12 were admitted for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) exacerbation and continued on azithromycin/doxycycline after result of the low PCT. Conclusion Utilization of antibiotics went against well-studied PCT cutoffs 45% of the time, primarily driven by antibiotic use at low PCT levels. Only a small number were continued on azithromycin/doxycycline for anti-inflammatory effect in COPD exacerbations, indicating that most patients received antibiotics for presumed bacterial infection despite the high negative predictive value of PCT. This study illustrates PCT use in real-world practice did not significantly alter prescribing practices, potentially from lack of confidence or knowledge in interpreting PCT results and lack of serial measurements to aid in decision-making. Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures.

Sore throat in adults – does the introduction of a clinical scoring system improve the management of these patients in a secondary care setting?

2005 ◽  
Vol 119 (7) ◽  
pp. 550-555 ◽  
Author(s):  
S L Woolley ◽  
J M Bernstein ◽  
J A Davidson ◽  
D R K Smith
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Sore Throat ◽  
Scoring System ◽  
Antibiotic Prescription ◽  
Inappropriate Prescribing ◽  
Antibiotic Prescribing ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Clinical Scoring ◽  
System 2 ◽  
New Guidelines

Objective: To audit sore throat management in adults, introduce proforma-based guidelines and to reaudit clinical practice.Setting: Adult emergency department of an inner city teaching hospital.Methods: A literature search was carried out to identify relevant guidelines. In stage one, patients presenting to the emergency department with sore throat were identified retrospectively from the emergency department attendance register. Proformas were completed retrospectively. In stage two, new guidelines were introduced and staff educated about the guidelines. In stage three, patients presenting with sore throat were identified at triage and proformas were completed at time of consultation.Outcome Measures: (1) appropriate clinical assessment of the likelihood of bacterial infection using the clinical scoring system, (2) appropriateness of antibiotic prescription, (3) recommendation of supportive treatments to patients.Results: Introduction of a clinical scoring system reduced the inappropriate prescribing of antibiotics from 44 per cent to 11 per cent. Correct antibiotic prescription rose from 60 per cent to 100 per cent. Although the variety of advice given about supportive treatment increased, the actual number of patients receiving documented supportive advice fell from 67.8 per cent in stage one to 58 per cent in stage three.Conclusion: The introduction of clinically based guidelines for the diagnosis and management of sore throat in adults can reduce inappropriate antibiotic prescribing.

scholarly journals Interrupted Time-Series Analysis to Evaluate the Impact of a Behavioral Change Outpatient Antibiotic Stewardship Intervention

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (S1) ◽  
pp. s15-s16
Author(s):  
Brittany Morgan ◽  
Larissa May ◽  
Haylee Bettencourt
Keyword(s):  
Quality Improvement ◽  
Antibiotic Stewardship ◽  
Respiratory Infections ◽  
Inappropriate Prescribing ◽  
The United States ◽  
Quality Improvement Intervention ◽  
Antibiotic Prescribing ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Improvement Intervention ◽  
Inappropriate Prescriptions

Background: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates that outpatient settings account for 85%–90% of antibiotic prescriptions in the United States, and ~30% of those prescriptions are unnecessary. One of the most common examples of inappropriate prescribing is for viral upper respiratory infections (URIs). Up to 50% of prescriptions written for URIs are deemed inappropriate, making it an important focus for Antibiotic Stewardship programs. In this study, we evaluated the effect of a behaviorally enhanced quality improvement intervention in reducing inappropriate antibiotic prescribing for viral URIs. Methods: A quasi-experimental study assessed the effects of an Antibiotic Stewardship intervention on antibiotic prescribing for viral URIs. The outcome of interest was a change in the number of antibiotics prescribed at each participating clinic over a 1-year preimplementation period and a 2-year postimplementation period. Time trends were analyzed using segmented regression analysis, and a stepped wedge design was used to account for intervention roll-out across clinics. Results: From 2017 to 2020, there were 63,028 patient visits in 21 clinic locations. Antibiotics were prescribed an average of 11.5% and 5.8% of visits during the pre- and postimplementation periods, respectively. The most frequently prescribed antibiotic over the study period was azithromycin (n = 3,551), followed by amoxicillin (n = 924). Overall, the intervention was associated with a 46% reduction in antibiotic prescriptions or 0.54 times (P = .001) as many inappropriate antibiotics prescribed as before the intervention. There was no significant change in the month-to-month trend in inappropriate prescriptions after the intervention was implemented (P = .87). Conclusions: Our study demonstrates that a behaviorally enhanced quality improvement intervention to reduce inappropriate prescribing for URI in ambulatory care encounters was successful in reducing potentially inappropriate prescriptions for presumed viral respiratory infections.Funding: NoDisclosures: None

scholarly journals Patients’ and Clinicians’ Perceptions of Antibiotic Prescribing for Upper Respiratory Infections in the Acute Care Setting

2018 ◽  
Vol 38 (5) ◽  
pp. 547-561 ◽  
Author(s):  
David A. Broniatowski ◽  
Eili Y. Klein ◽  
Larissa May ◽  
Elena M. Martinez ◽  
Chelsea Ware ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Antibiotic Resistance ◽  
Side Effects ◽  
Acute Care ◽  
Respiratory Infections ◽  
Inappropriate Prescribing ◽  
Antibiotic Prescribing ◽  
Bottom Line ◽  
The Status ◽  
Hospital Emergency Departments ◽  
Multifactor Regression

Reducing inappropriate prescribing is key to mitigating antibiotic resistance, particularly in acute care settings. Clinicians’ prescribing decisions are influenced by their judgments and actual or perceived patient expectations. Fuzzy trace theory predicts that patients and clinicians base such decisions on categorical gist representations that reflect the bottom-line understanding of information about antibiotics. However, due to clinicians’ specialized training, the categorical gists driving clinicians’ and patients’ decisions might differ, which could result in mismatched expectations and inefficiencies in targeting interventions. We surveyed clinicians and patients from 2 large urban academic hospital emergency departments (EDs) and a sample of nonpatient subjects regarding their gist representations of antibiotic decisions, as well as relevant knowledge and expectations. Results were analyzed using exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and multifactor regression. In total, 149 clinicians (47% female; 74% white), 519 online subjects (45% female; 78% white), and 225 ED patients (61% female; 56% black) completed the survey. While clinicians demonstrated greater knowledge of antibiotics and concern about side effects than patients, the predominant categorical gist for both patients and clinicians was “why not take a risk,” which compares the status quo of remaining sick to the possibility of benefit from antibiotics. This gist also predicted expectations and prior prescribing in the nonpatient sample. Other representations reflected the gist that “germs are germs” conflating bacteria and viruses, as well as perceptions of side effects and efficacy. Although individually rational, reliance on the “why not take a risk” representation can lead to socially suboptimal results, including antibiotic resistance and individual patient harm due to adverse events. Changing this representation could alter clinicians’ and patients’ expectations, suggesting opportunities to reduce overprescribing.

scholarly journals Appropriateness of Antibiotic Prescribing in Patients Discharged From a Community Hospital Emergency Department

2022 ◽  
pp. 10-19
Author(s):  
Emily Bauman ◽  
Justine Russell ◽  
Angela Morelli
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Inappropriate Prescribing ◽  
Time Of Day ◽  
Common Disease ◽  
Antibiotic Prescribing ◽  
Oral Antibiotic ◽  
Provider Type ◽  
Electronic Health Record Data ◽  
Prescribing Trends

IMPORTANCE: Every year, thousands of emergency department (ED) visits result in patients being discharged with oral antibiotic prescriptions. Published studies that assess the appropriateness of these antibiotic regimens are limited. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to examine the appropriateness of antibiotic prescriptions written for patients discharged from a community hospital’s ED. ENDPOINTS: The primary objective was to determine the overall percent of appropriate antibiotic prescriptions for patients discharged from the ED. Secondary objectives included the following: identify reasons for inappropriateness categorized by antibiotic selection, dose, duration, and allergies; identify the most common antibiotics prescribed inappropriately as well as the most common disease states that led to inappropriate prescribing of antibiotics; and analyze prescribing trends based on provider type and time of day the prescription was written. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Patients eligible for inclusion were adults age 18 and older who presented to the ED during four chosen weeks in 2019 and who were discharged with oral antibiotics. Extracted electronic health record data was reviewed to identify the discharge diagnosis for each patient that meets the inclusion criteria. Pertinent information gathered from the patients’ medical records along with a validated antimicrobial assessment tool were utilized to determine the level of appropriateness of the prescribed antibiotic regimens. RESULTS: A total of 76% of the prescribed antibiotics were appropriate, 16% were inappropriate, and the remaining 8% were not assessable. Duration was the most common reason for a regimen to not be optimal. The most frequently inappropriately prescribed antibiotics included cephalexin (but it is noted cephalexin was included in almost half of the antibiotic regimens in this study), clindamycin, and azithromycin. Infections that were most frequently treated inappropriately were skin and soft tissue infections, dental infections, and sinusitis. Overall, medical residents prescribed the highest percent of appropriate regimens, and the time of day that had the highest percent of appropriate prescriptions was third shift (11 p.m. to 7 a.m.). CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: Almost half of all the nonoptimal antibiotic regimens had an excessive duration. Targeted local education efforts and future clinical decision support can facilitate appropriate prescribing of discharge antibiotics from the ED, ultimately improving antimicrobial stewardship within the community.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document