160. Urgent Care Prescriber Perspectives on Antibiotic Prescribing During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Abstract Background Urgent care practices were significantly impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Studies conducted early in the pandemic demonstrated dramatic decreases in outpatient antibiotic prescribing, particularly amongst agents typically used for respiratory infections. We observed a 33% decline in urgent care antibiotics prescribing during the COVID-19 pandemic in our urgent care clinics. We investigated the prescriber experience to elucidate factors influencing antibiotic use for respiratory conditions during the COVID-19 pandemic at two academic urgent care clinics. Methods We employed a mix method approach, first distributing a survey to all full-time prescribers. We then followed up with qualitative interviews (12 of 22 prescribers) which was conducted by a single, trained interviewer using a standardized guide. Interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Each transcription was independently reviewed and coded by two blinded investigators using standardized themes and adjudicated by a third investigator for stability, robustness, and interrater reliability. Individually, researchers identified and coded key themes and statements. These themes were then discussed as a group and combined where they shared meaning. This project was reviewed and deemed to be non-human subjects research by the Stanford University School of Medicine Panel on Human Subjects in Medical Research. Results A total of 20 of the 22 prescribers (13 MDs and 9 APPs) completed the survey (91% response rate). Notably, only 25% of prescribers agreed that COVID-19 had changed their antibiotic prescribing practices for patients with respiratory infections despite objective data that all prescribed less. In the qualitative interviews, we identified four major themes impacting the appropriateness of antibiotic prescribing practices as shown in Table 1. Conclusion Urgent care prescribers attributed a decrease in antibiotic prescribing during COVID-19 to changes in patient expectations and knowledge base, a switch to telemedicine-based encounters, and changing epidemiology. These shifts could be utilized by outpatient antimicrobial stewardship efforts to sustain low prescribing rates for conditions in which antibiotics are generally not indicated. Disclosures Marisa Holubar, MD, MS, Nothing to disclose

Download Full-text

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

Open Forum Infectious Diseases ◽

10.1093/ofid/ofz360.1672 ◽

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.

Download Full-text

Evaluation of antibiotic prescribing in emergency departments and urgent care centers across the Veterans’ Health Administration

Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology ◽

10.1017/ice.2020.1289 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 1-8

Author(s):

James L. Lowery ◽

Bruce Alexander ◽

Rajeshwari Nair ◽

Brett H. Heintz ◽

Daniel J. Livorsi

Keyword(s):

Emergency Departments ◽

Respiratory Infections ◽

Antibiotic Use ◽

Veterans Health Administration ◽

Urgent Care ◽

Antibiotic Prescribing ◽

Veterans Health ◽

Health Administration ◽

Urgent Care Centers ◽

Exacerbation Of Copd

Abstract Objective: Assessments of antibiotic prescribing in ambulatory care have largely focused on viral acute respiratory infections (ARIs). It is unclear whether antibiotic prescribing for bacterial ARIs should also be a target for antibiotic stewardship efforts. In this study, we evaluated antibiotic prescribing for viral and potentially bacterial ARIs in patients seen at emergency departments (EDs) and urgent care centers (UCCs). Design: This retrospective cohort included all ED and UCC visits by patients who were not hospitalized and were seen during weekday, daytime hours during 2016–2018 in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA). Guideline concordance was evaluated for viral ARIs and for 3 potentially bacterial ARIs: acute exacerbation of COPD, pneumonia, and sinusitis. Results: There were 3,182,926 patient visits across 129 sites: 80.7% in EDs and 19.3% in UCCs. Mean patient age was 60.2 years, 89.4% were male, and 65.6% were white. Antibiotics were prescribed during 608,289 (19.1%) visits, including 42.7% with an inappropriate indication. For potentially bacterial ARIs, guideline-concordant management varied across clinicians (median, 36.2%; IQR, 26.0–52.7) and sites (median, 38.2%; IQR, 31.7–49.4). For viral ARIs, guideline-concordant management also varied across clinicians (median, 46.2%; IQR, 24.1–68.6) and sites (median, 40.0%; IQR, 30.4–59.3). At the clinician and site levels, we detected weak correlations between guideline-concordant management for viral ARIs and potentially bacterial ARIs: clinicians (r = 0.35; P = .0001) and sites (r = 0.44; P < .0001). Conclusions: Our findings suggest that, across EDs and UCCs within VHA, there are major opportunities to improve management of both viral and potentially bacterial ARIs. Some clinicians and sites are more frequently adhering to ARI guideline recommendations on antibiotic use.

Download Full-text

131. Antimicrobial Usage for Respiratory Infections in Urgent Care Settings within the University of Washington Medicine Network

Open Forum Infectious Diseases ◽

10.1093/ofid/ofaa439.176 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. S77-S77

Author(s):

Joanne Huang ◽

Zahra Kassamali Escobar ◽

Rupali Jain ◽

Jeannie D Chan ◽

John B Lynch ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Adverse Drug Events ◽

Respiratory Infections ◽

Inappropriate Prescribing ◽

Urgent Care ◽

Antibiotic Prescribing ◽

Prescribing Practices ◽

University Of Washington ◽

Tract Infections ◽

Viral Respiratory Infections ◽

Viral Respiratory

Abstract Background In an effort to combat antimicrobial resistance and adverse drug events, The Joint Commission mandated expansion of antimicrobial stewardship programs into ambulatory healthcare settings Jan 2020. The most common diagnoses resulting in inappropriate antimicrobial prescribing are respiratory infections. This study aimed to assess the rate of antibiotic prescribing for viral respiratory tract infections within six urgent care clinics affiliated with University of Washington Medicine health system in Seattle, WA. Methods This was a retrospective observational study from Jan 2019-Feb 2020. We used the MITIGATE toolkit; a resource that meets CDC’s core elements for outpatient stewardship. Patients were identified based upon pre-specified ICD-10 codes for viral respiratory infections. The primary outcome was the rate of unnecessary antimicrobial prescriptions for acute viral respiratory infections. Secondary outcomes evaluated inappropriate prescribing practices based on antibiotic selection, diagnosis, and age. Results Of 7,313 patients (6078 adults and 1235 pediatric) included, 23% were inappropriately prescribed antibiotics. The most common antibiotics inappropriately prescribed were azithromycin (62%), amoxicillin (13%), and doxycycline (13%). Fluoroquinolone (FQ) utilization was low (2%). Bronchitis (61%) and nonsuppurative otitis media (NSOM) (24%) were the most common viral diagnoses for which antibiotics were prescribed. Overall, unnecessary prescribing was lower in pediatrics than adults at 13% and 25%, respectively (p< 0.001). Adults were more often prescribed antibiotics inappropriately for bronchitis and NSOM compared to pediatrics (p=0.0013). Conclusion Inappropriate prescribing practices across six urgent care clinics varied based upon age and diagnosis. Azithromycin is most often inappropriately prescribed but the low rate of FQ prescribing is encouraging. The lower rate of unnecessary prescribing in pediatrics is promising although there is room for improvement as 1 in 8 children were unnecessarily prescribed antibiotics. These findings support the need for antibiotic stewardship in the outpatient setting, targeting areas for azithromycin use and therapeutic management of bronchitis. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

Download Full-text

A retrospective audit of antibiotic prescriptions in a Lebanese Hospital

International Journal of Infection Control ◽

10.3396/ijic.v15i1.001.19 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 15 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Mohamad Ibrahim ◽

Zeinab Bazzi

Keyword(s):

Epidemiological Data ◽

Antibiotic Use ◽

Antibiotic Prescribing ◽

Team Approach ◽

Strong Correlations ◽

Prescribing Practices ◽

Antimicrobial Drugs ◽

Stewardship Program ◽

Retrospective Audit ◽

Attending Physician

Despite the frequent alarms that have been published about the adverse effects of antibiotic use and misuse, physicians prescribe to patients approximately fifty percent of unnecessary antimicrobials. In an attempt to decrease the emergence of antimicrobial resistance and increase awareness, a team approach is required to address this prescribing phenomenon in a feasible manner. A retrospective study was done at a one-hundred-forty-bed hospital with a representative sample size of 368 patients. Patient data was collected and analyzed by a stewardship team. The overall antibiotic inappropriate rate was 45.8%, which is relatively high and consistent with the findings of other studies mentioned in the literature. This study aimed to provide baseline epidemiological data on the use of antibiotics in a Lebanese hospital and has revealed several notable patterns of antibiotic prescribing practices among Lebanese physicians such as the use of antimicrobial drugs example penicillin was consistently high. Strong correlations were identified between the type of attending physician and antibiotic appropriateness. These findings will be important in constructing an antimicrobial stewardship program to reduce antibiotic misuse.

Download Full-text

229. Hospitalists Antimicrobial Scorecard Improves Antibiotic Prescribing at a Community Teaching Hospital

Open Forum Infectious Diseases ◽

10.1093/ofid/ofaa439.273 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. S116-S116

Author(s):

Julia Sessa ◽

Helen Jacoby ◽

Bruce Blain ◽

Lisa Avery

Keyword(s):

Patient Care ◽

Teaching Hospital ◽

Antimicrobial Stewardship ◽

Rank Order ◽

Antibiotic Use ◽

Outpatient Setting ◽

Antibiotic Prescribing ◽

Full Time ◽

Days Of Therapy ◽

The Impact

Abstract Background Measuring antimicrobial consumption data is a foundation of antimicrobial stewardship programs. There is data to support antimicrobial scorecard utilization to improve antibiotic use in the outpatient setting. There is a lack of data on the impact of an antimicrobial scorecard for hospitalists. Our objective was to improve antibiotic prescribing amongst the hospitalist service through the development of an antimicrobial scorecard. Methods Conducted in a 451-bed teaching hospital amongst 22 full time hospitalists. The antimicrobial scorecard for 2019 was distributed in two phases. In October 2019, baseline antibiotic prescribing data (January – September 2019) was distributed. In January 2020, a second scorecard was distributed (October – December 2019) to assess the impact of the scorecard. The scorecard distributed via e-mail to physicians included: Antibiotic days of therapy/1,000 patient care days (corrected for attending census), route of antibiotic prescribing (% intravenous (IV) vs % oral (PO)) and percentage of patients prescribed piperacillin-tazobactam (PT) for greater than 3 days. Hospitalists received their data in rank order amongst their peers. Along with the antimicrobial scorecard, recommendations from the antimicrobial stewardship team were included for hospitalists to improve their antibiotic prescribing for these initiatives. Hospitalists demographics (years of practice and gender) were collected. Descriptive statistics were utilized to analyze pre and post data. Results Sixteen (16) out of 22 (73%) hospitalists improved their antibiotic prescribing from pre- to post-scorecard (χ 2(1)=3.68, p = 0.055). The median antibiotic days of therapy/1,000 patient care days decreased from 661 pre-scorecard to 618 post-scorecard (p = 0.043). The median PT use greater than 3 days also decreased significantly, from 18% pre-scorecard to 11% post-scorecard (p = 0.0025). There was no change in % of IV antibiotic prescribing and no correlation between years of experience or gender to antibiotic prescribing. Conclusion Providing antimicrobial scorecards to our hospitalist service resulted in a significant decrease in antibiotic days of therapy/1,000 patient care days and PT prescribing beyond 3 days. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

Download Full-text

143. Initial Impact of COVID-19 on Ambulatory Antibiotic Prescribing for Respiratory Viral Infections

Open Forum Infectious Diseases ◽

10.1093/ofid/ofaa439.188 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. S82-S82

Author(s):

Zahra Kassamali Escobar ◽

Todd Bouchard ◽

Jose Mari Lansang ◽

Scott Thomassen ◽

Joanne Huang ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Primary Care ◽

Viral Infections ◽

Respiratory Infections ◽

Urgent Care ◽

Antibiotic Prescribing ◽

Specific Rate ◽

Inclusion Criteria ◽

Diagnosis Codes ◽

Control And Prevention ◽

Viral Respiratory Infections

Abstract Background Between 15–50% of patients seen in ambulatory settings are prescribed an antibiotic. At least one third of this usage is considered unnecessary. In 2019, our institution implemented the MITIGATE Toolkit, endorsed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to reduce inappropriate antibiotic prescribing for viral respiratory infections in emergency and urgent care settings. In February 2020 we identified our first hospitalized patient with SARS-CoV(2). In March, efforts to limit person-to-person contact led to shelter in place orders and substantial reorganization of our healthcare system. During this time we continued to track rates of unnecessary antibiotic prescribing. Methods This was a single center observational study. Electronic medical record data were accessed to determine antibiotic prescribing and diagnosis codes. We provided monthly individual feedback to urgent care prescribers, (Sep 2019-Mar 2020), primary care, and ED providers (Jan 2020 – Mar 2020) notifying them of their specific rate of unnecessary antibiotic prescribing and labeling them as a top performer or not a top performer compared to their peers. The primary outcome was rate of inappropriate antibiotic prescribing. Results Pre toolkit intervention, 14,398 patient visits met MITIGATE inclusion criteria and 12% received an antibiotic unnecessarily in Jan-April 2019. Post-toolkit intervention, 12,328 patient visits met inclusion criteria and 7% received an antibiotic unnecessarily in Jan-April 2020. In April 2020, patient visits dropped to 10–50% of what they were in March 2020 and April 2019. During this time the unnecessary antibiotic prescribing rate doubled in urgent care to 7.8% from 3.6% the previous month and stayed stable in primary care and the ED at 3.2% and 11.8% respectively in April compared to 4.6% and 10.4% in the previous month. Conclusion Rates of inappropriate antibiotic prescribing were reduced nearly in half from 2019 to 2020 across 3 ambulatory care settings. The increase in prescribing in April seen in urgent care and after providers stopped receiving their monthly feedback is concerning. Many factors may have contributed to this increase, but it raises concerns for increased inappropriate antibacterial usage as a side effect of the SARS-CoV(2) pandemic. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

Download Full-text

Implementing interventions to reduce antibiotic use: a qualitative study in high-prescribing practices

BMC Family Practice ◽

10.1186/s12875-021-01371-6 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 22 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Aleksandra J. Borek ◽

◽

Anne Campbell ◽

Elle Dent ◽

Christopher C. Butler ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Focus Groups ◽

Point Of Care ◽

Antibiotic Use ◽

Antibiotic Prescribing ◽

Prescribing Practices ◽

Focus Group Study ◽

Clinical Uncertainty ◽

Reactive Protein ◽

Clinical Tools ◽

The Many

Abstract Background Trials have shown that delayed antibiotic prescriptions (DPs) and point-of-care C-Reactive Protein testing (POC-CRPT) are effective in reducing antibiotic use in general practice, but these were not typically implemented in high-prescribing practices. We aimed to explore views of professionals from high-prescribing practices about uptake and implementation of DPs and POC-CRPT to reduce antibiotic use. Methods This was a qualitative focus group study in English general practices. The highest antibiotic prescribing practices in the West Midlands were invited to participate. Clinical and non-clinical professionals attended focus groups co-facilitated by two researchers. Focus groups were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically. Results Nine practices (50 professionals) participated. Four main themes were identified. Compatibility of strategies with clinical roles and experience – participants viewed the strategies as having limited value as ‘clinical tools’, perceiving them as useful only in ‘rare’ instances of clinical uncertainty and/or for those less experienced. Strategies as ‘social tools’ – participants perceived the strategies as helpful for negotiating treatment decisions and educating patients, particularly those expecting antibiotics. Ambiguities – participants perceived ambiguities around when they should be used, and about their impact on antibiotic use. Influence of context – various other situational and practical issues were raised with implementing the strategies. Conclusions High-prescribing practices do not view DPs and POC-CRPT as sufficiently useful ‘clinical tools’ in a way which corresponds to the current policy approach advocating their use to reduce clinical uncertainty and improve antimicrobial stewardship. Instead, policy attention should focus on how these strategies may instead be used as ‘social tools’ to reduce unnecessary antibiotic use. Attention should also focus on the many ambiguities (concerns and questions) about, and contextual barriers to, using these strategies that need addressing to support wider and more consistent implementation.

Download Full-text

Development of an Electronic Algorithm to Identify Inappropriate Antibiotic Prescribing for Pediatric Pharyngitis

Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology ◽

10.1017/ice.2020.728 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 41 (S1) ◽

pp. s188-s189

Author(s):

Jeffrey Gerber ◽

Robert Grundmeier ◽

Keith Hamilton ◽

Lauri Hicks ◽

Melinda Neuhauser ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Predictive Value ◽

Gold Standard ◽

Antibiotic Stewardship ◽

Chart Review ◽

Antibiotic Use ◽

Audit And Feedback ◽

Urgent Care ◽

Antibiotic Prescribing ◽

Tract Infections ◽

The Impact

Background: Antibiotic overuse contributes to antibiotic resistance and unnecessary adverse drug effects. Antibiotic stewardship interventions have primarily focused on acute-care settings. Most antibiotic use, however, occurs in outpatients with acute respiratory tract infections such as pharyngitis. The electronic health record (EHR) might provide an effective and efficient tool for outpatient antibiotic stewardship. We aimed to develop and validate an electronic algorithm to identify inappropriate antibiotic use for pediatric outpatients with pharyngitis. Methods: This study was conducted within the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia (CHOP) Care Network, including 31 pediatric primary care practices and 3 urgent care centers with a shared EHR serving >250,000 children. We used International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) codes to identify encounters for pharyngitis at any CHOP practice from March 15, 2017, to March 14, 2018, excluding those with concurrent infections (eg, otitis media, sinusitis), immunocompromising conditions, or other comorbidities that might influence the need for antibiotics. We randomly selected 450 features for detailed chart abstraction assessing patient demographics as well as practice and prescriber characteristics. Appropriateness of antibiotic use based on chart review served as the gold standard for evaluating the electronic algorithm. Criteria for appropriate use included streptococcal testing, use of penicillin or amoxicillin (absent β-lactam allergy), and a 10-day duration of therapy. Results: In 450 patients, the median age was 8.4 years (IQR, 5.5–9.0) and 54% were women. On chart review, 149 patients (33%) received an antibiotic, of whom 126 had a positive rapid strep result. Thus, based on chart review, 23 subjects (5%) diagnosed with pharyngitis received antibiotics inappropriately. Amoxicillin or penicillin was prescribed for 100 of the 126 children (79%) with a positive rapid strep test. Of the 126 children with a positive test, 114 (90%) received the correct antibiotic: amoxicillin, penicillin, or an appropriate alternative antibiotic due to b-lactam allergy. Duration of treatment was correct for all 126 children. Using the electronic algorithm, the proportion of inappropriate prescribing was 28 of 450 (6%). The test characteristics of the electronic algorithm (compared to gold standard chart review) for identification of inappropriate antibiotic prescribing were sensitivity (99%, 422 of 427); specificity (100%, 23 of 23); positive predictive value (82%, 23 of 28); and negative predictive value (100%, 422 of 422). Conclusions: For children with pharyngitis, an electronic algorithm for identification of inappropriate antibiotic prescribing is highly accurate. Future work should validate this approach in other settings and develop and evaluate the impact of an audit and feedback intervention based on this tool.Funding: NoneDisclosures: None

Download Full-text

Antimicrobial Stewardship Interventions to Optimize Treatment of Infections in Nursing Home Residents: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Journal of Applied Gerontology ◽

10.1177/07334648211018299 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 073346482110182

Author(s):

Sainfer Aliyu ◽

Jasmine L. Travers ◽

S. Layla Heimlich ◽

Joanne Ifill ◽

Arlene Smaldone

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Nursing Home ◽

Antibiotic Stewardship ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Nursing Home Residents ◽

Antibiotic Use ◽

Antibiotic Prescribing ◽

Prescribing Practices ◽

Stewardship Program ◽

Meta Analyses

Effects of antibiotic stewardship program (ASP) interventions to optimize antibiotic use for infections in nursing home (NH) residents remain unclear. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess ASPs in NHs and their effects on antibiotic use, multi-drug-resistant organisms, antibiotic prescribing practices, and resident mortality. Following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis using five databases (1988–2020). Nineteen articles were included, 10 met the criteria for quantitative synthesis. Inappropriate antibiotic use decreased following ASP intervention in eight studies with a pooled decrease of 13.8% (95% confidence interval [CI]: [4.7, 23.0]; Cochran’s Q = 166,837.8, p < .001, I2 = 99.9%) across studies. Decrease in inappropriate antibiotic use was highest in studies that examined antibiotic use for urinary tract infection (UTI). Education and antibiotic stewardship algorithms for UTI were the most effective interventions. Evidence surrounding ASPs in NH is weak, with recommendations suited for UTIs.

Download Full-text

Prescribers’ Knowledge, Attitudes and Behaviors on Antibiotics, Antibiotic Use and Antibiotic Resistance in Jordan

Antibiotics ◽

10.3390/antibiotics10070858 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 10 (7) ◽

pp. 858

Author(s):

Reema A. Karasneh ◽

Sayer I. Al-Azzam ◽

Mera Ababneh ◽

Ola Al-Azzeh ◽

Ola B. Al-Batayneh ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Antibiotic Resistance ◽

Antibiotic Use ◽

Cross Sectional Study ◽

Antibiotic Prescribing ◽

Prescribing Practices ◽

Online Questionnaire ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Attitudes And Behaviors ◽

And Behaviors ◽

Ease Of Access

More research is needed on the drivers of irrational antibiotic prescribing among healthcare professionals and to ensure effective prescribing and an adequate understanding of the issue of antibiotic resistance. This study aimed at evaluating prescribers’ knowledge, attitudes and behaviors about antibiotic use and antibiotic resistance. A cross-sectional study was conducted utilizing an online questionnaire and included physicians and dentists from all sectors in Jordan. A total of 613 prescribers were included (physicians n = 409, dentists n = 204). Respondents’ knowledge on effective use, unnecessary use or associated side effects of antibiotics was high (>90%), compared with their knowledge on the spread of antibiotic resistance (62.2%). For ease of access to the required guidelines on managing infections, and to materials that advise on prudent antibiotic use and antibiotic resistance, prescribers agreed in 62% and 46.1% of cases, respectively. 28.4% of respondents had prescribed antibiotics when they would have preferred not to do so more than once a day or more than once a week. Among respondents who prescribed antibiotics, 63.4% would never or rarely give out resources on prudent use of antibiotics for infections. The findings are of importance to inform antibiotic stewardships about relevant interventions aimed at changing prescribers’ behaviors and improving antibiotic prescribing practices.

Download Full-text