scholarly journals Digital Care Providers Antibiotic Prescribing Compared to Traditional Primary Healthcare: A Retrospective Database Study of 332,987 Healthcare Visits in Sweden.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Justyna Ivarsson ◽  
Thorne Wallman ◽  
Andy Wallman
Keyword(s):  
Primary Healthcare ◽  
Antibiotic Prescription ◽  
Personal Information ◽  
Antibiotic Prescribing ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Place Of Residence ◽  
Diagnosis Codes ◽  
Icd 10 ◽  
Virtual Visits ◽  
Retrospective Database

Abstract ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to examine if there was a difference in antibiotic prescribing between private digital care providers, and traditional primary healthcare, and to investigate if the prescriptions differed regarding diagnosis between virtual visits and physical visits adjusted for age, sex, and place of residence for patients seeking care digitally and in person.MethodsAntibiotic prescribing based on ATC-codes during the period of two months in 2020 was studied. Prescriptions issued by online doctors and by physicians working within PHC Sörmland County, Sweden were considered. Information about healthcare provider, date of the visit, staff category that patient had contact with, ICD-10-diagnosis codes, ATC-codes of prescribed medicines and personal information such as: age, sex, and place of residence were used. Statistical analysis and logistic regression were performed.ResultsAltogether 332,987 healthcare visits were registered. Of all visits to physicians at PHC in Region Sörmland, antibiotics were prescribed in 5.9% of cases, and 3.9% of all visits to online doctors. The total number of visits that led to infection diagnosis was 112,354. Within physical visits at PHC 21.5% infection visits ended with antibiotic prescription, while within online visits the corresponding percentage was 10.1%. Additionally, the study focused on seventeen infection diagnoses.ConclusionThis study has shown that private digital care providers do not prescribe more antibiotics than doctors at PHC. Probability of receiving antibiotic prescription during digital visits was 4.88 times lower compared to physical visits.

scholarly journals Appropriateness of outpatient antibiotic prescribing among privately insured US patients: ICD-10-CM based cross sectional study

BMJ ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. k5092 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kao-Ping Chua ◽  
Michael A Fischer ◽  
Jeffrey A Linder
Keyword(s):  
Classification Scheme ◽  
Antibiotic Prescription ◽  
Antibiotic Prescribing ◽  
Diagnosis Code ◽  
Diagnosis Codes ◽  
The Us ◽  
Look Back ◽  
Icd 10 ◽  
Recent Diagnosis ◽  
Privately Insured

Abstract Objective To assess the appropriateness of outpatient antibiotic prescribing for privately insured children and non-elderly adults in the US using a comprehensive classification scheme of diagnosis codes in ICD-10-CM (international classification of diseases-clinical modification, 10th revision), which replaced ICD-9-CM in the US on 1 October 2015. Design Cross sectional study. Setting MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters database, 2016. Participants 19.2 million enrollees aged 0-64 years. Main outcome measures A classification scheme was developed that determined whether each of the 91 738 ICD-10-CM diagnosis codes “always,” “sometimes,” or “never” justified antibiotics. For each antibiotic prescription fill, this scheme was used to classify all diagnosis codes in claims during a look back period that began three days before antibiotic prescription fills and ended on the day fills occurred. The main outcome was the proportion of fills in each of four mutually exclusive categories: “appropriate” (associated with at least one “always” code during the look back period, “potentially appropriate” (associated with at least one “sometimes” but no “always” codes), “inappropriate” (associated only with “never” codes), and “not associated with a recent diagnosis code” (no codes during the look back period). Results The cohort (n=19 203 264) comprised 14 571 944 (75.9%) adult and 9 935 791 (51.7%) female enrollees. Among 15 455 834 outpatient antibiotic prescription fills by the cohort, the most common antibiotics were azithromycin (2 931 242, 19.0%), amoxicillin (2 818 939, 18.2%), and amoxicillin-clavulanate (1 784 921, 11.6%). Among these 15 455 834 fills, 1 973 873 (12.8%) were appropriate, 5 487 003 (35.5%) were potentially appropriate, 3 592 183 (23.2%) were inappropriate, and 4 402 775 (28.5%) were not associated with a recent diagnosis code. Among the 3 592 183 inappropriate fills, 2 541 125 (70.7%) were written in office based settings, 222 804 (6.2%) in urgent care centers, and 168 396 (4.7%) in emergency departments. In 2016, 2 697 918 (14.1%) of the 19 203 264 enrollees filled at least one inappropriate antibiotic prescription, including 490 475 out of 4 631 320 children (10.6%) and 2 207 173 out of 14 571 944 adults (15.2%). Conclusions Among all outpatient antibiotic prescription fills by 19 203 264 privately insured US children and non-elderly adults in 2016, 23.2% were inappropriate, 35.5% were potentially appropriate, and 28.5% were not associated with a recent diagnosis code. Approximately 1 in 7 enrollees filled at least one inappropriate antibiotic prescription in 2016. The classification scheme could facilitate future efforts to comprehensively measure outpatient antibiotic appropriateness in the US, and it could be adapted for use in other countries that use ICD-10 codes.

scholarly journals 1123. Specificity of Diagnosis Codes and Adequacy of Supportive Documentation for Common Acute Pediatric Infections: Implications for Ambulatory Stewardship

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. S399-S399
Author(s):  
Zachary Willis ◽  
Elizabeth Walters
Keyword(s):  
Acute Otitis Media ◽  
Antibiotic Prescribing ◽  
National Guidelines ◽  
Laboratory Findings ◽  
Healthcare Settings ◽  
Diagnosis Codes ◽  
Icd 10 ◽  
Pediatric Infections ◽  
Data Elements ◽  
Physical Findings

Abstract Background Assessing the appropriateness of antibiotic prescribing in ambulatory care generally relies on the accuracy of diagnosis codes, which is uncertain. It is also uncertain if documented history and physical findings support antibiotic indications (AI). We completed a retrospective study of pediatric primary care (PPC) encounters to determine: A) if documented findings supported documented AI; and B) whether diagnosis codes captured documented AI (figure). Methods We conducted point-prevalence audits of the 9 PPC clinics in our healthcare system, randomly selecting one weekday per month to review all visits between 9/2017 and 4/2018. We included only encounters with antibiotic prescribing. We reviewed clinician notes, orders, laboratory results, and ICD-10 diagnosis codes. We recorded demographics; visit date/location; AI as documented in notes; history, examination, and laboratory findings; and diagnosis codes. We used national guidelines to determine whether documentation supported AI. We calculated the sensitivity of diagnosis codes using documented AI as the gold standard. Results The sample included 452 encounters. The most common AI were acute otitis media (AOM), pharyngitis, and sinusitis. For AOM, 163 of 168 encounters (97.0%) had an appropriate diagnosis code; for pharyngitis, 127 of 138 (92.0%); and for sinusitis, 68 of 75 (90.7%). For AOM, 160 of 168 encounters (95.2%) had adequate documentation of supportive findings. For sinusitis, 44 of 75 encounters had adequate supporting history and/or examination findings (58.7%). For pharyngitis, while 135 of 139 (97.1%) had a positive streptococcal test, 104 of 139 (74.8%) had history and examination findings to support testing. Conclusion By chart review, we identified each AI and evaluated whether findings supported those AI. The sensitivity of diagnosis codes for AI ranged from 90.7–97.0% for common conditions; this result can inform the design of ambulatory stewardship programs. Only 74.8% of children treated for pharyngitis and 58.7% of children treated for sinusitis had sufficient supporting documentation. Use of discrete data elements alone (Figure 1) may result in overestimates of the proportion of children for whom antibiotics are appropriate. Further research is needed across healthcare settings. Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures

scholarly journals 1632. Non-Visit-Based and Non-Infection-Related Ambulatory Antibiotic Prescribing

2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (suppl_1) ◽  
pp. S43-S43 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey A Linder ◽  
Tiffany Brown ◽  
Ji Young Lee ◽  
Kao-Ping Chua ◽  
Michael A Fischer
Keyword(s):  
Nurse Practitioners ◽  
Physician Assistants ◽  
Antibiotic Prescribing ◽  
Face To Face ◽  
Health Delivery ◽  
Online Portal ◽  
Diagnosis Codes ◽  
Icd 10 ◽  
Primary Care Clinicians ◽  
Attending Physicians

Abstract Background Many studies have examined or intervened on ambulatory antibiotic prescribing based on infection-related diagnosis codes. However, clinicians may prescribe antibiotics without seeing patients face-to-face or without documenting an infection-related diagnosis. Methods We measured the prevalence of non-visit-based and non-infection-related oral, antibacterial–antibiotic prescribing between November 2015 and October 2017 using the EHR of an integrated health delivery system. We examined the visit type (in-person vs. other) and classified prescriptions into 3 mutually exclusive groups based on same-day diagnosis codes: (1) infection-related for prescriptions associated with at least one of 21,730 ICD-10 codes that may signify infection; (2) non-infection-related for prescriptions only associated with the 72,519 ICD-10 codes that do not signify infections; and (3) associated with no diagnosis. Results There were 509,534 antibiotic prescriptions made to 279,169 unique patients by 2,413 clinicians in 514 clinics. Patients had a mean age of 43 years old, were 60% women, and 75% white. Clinicians were 54% women; were 63% attending physicians, 18% residents/fellows, 10% nurse practitioners, and 7% physician assistants; and were 41% medical specialists, 21% primary care clinicians, and 7% surgical specialists. The most common antibiotic classes were penicillins (30%), macrolides (23%), cephalosporins (14%), fluoroquinolones (11%), tetracyclines (10%), and sulfonamides (6%). Clinicians prescribed 20% of antibiotics outside of an in-person visit; prescription encounters were in-person (80%), telephone (10%), order-only (4%), refill (4%), and online portal (1%). Clinicians prescribed 46% of antibiotics without an infection-related diagnosis: 54% of antibiotic prescriptions were infection-related, 29% were non-infection-related, and 17% were associated with no diagnosis. Various look-back and look-forward durations for diagnosis codes changed the results only slightly. Conclusion Clinicians prescribed 20% of antibiotics outside of in-person visits and 46% of antibiotics without an infection-related diagnosis. Interventions that target visit-based, diagnosis-specific prescriptions miss a large share of antibiotic prescribing. Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures.

scholarly journals Antibiotic Prescribing Patterns by Health Care Providers in Pediatric Outpatients: A Prospective Observational Study

2021 ◽  
Vol In Press (In Press) ◽  
Author(s):  
Siva Kumar Ramasamy ◽  
Prachi Goyal ◽  
Nirbhay Mehta
Keyword(s):  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Prospective Observational Study ◽  
Antibiotic Prescription ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Reference Value ◽  
Prescribing Patterns ◽  
Outpatient Department ◽  
Antibiotic Prescribing ◽  
Care Providers

Objectives: To audit the patterns and quality of antibiotic prescription for children in the outpatient department (OPD). Methods: This prospective observational study was conducted on the tertiary care outpatient department of a teaching hospital. One thousand prescriptions for children between 1 month and 15 years of age, who attended the outpatient department of a tertiary care teaching hospital between April 2018 and May 2019, were included. The quality of prescriptions was assessed based on 12 pretest parameters. One score was given to each correctly written parameter, and total scores were categorized as poor (0 - 4), average (5 - 8), and good (9 - 12). The core prescribing indicators presented by the world health organization (WHO) were used to analyze antibiotic prescribing patterns. The data were analyzed using open-source Epidata software. Results: Out of 1000 prescriptions, quality was average in 490 (49%) and poor in 46 (4.6%) prescriptions. The average number of medicines prescribed per encounter was 3.5 (reference value < 2). The medicines were prescribed by their generic names in 27.3% of the prescriptions (reference value 100%). Antibiotics and injections appeared in 65% (reference value < 30%) and 6% (reference value < 20%) of the prescriptions. The ratio of prescription from a list of essential medicines was 15% (reference value 100%). According to the prescriber profile, the rate of prescribing an antibiotic was 63% by postgraduates in pediatrics, 70% by MBBS, and 90% by AYUSH doctors (reference value < 30%). Conclusions: More than half of the prescriptions could not attain a good score. There is room for improving prescription writing practice. Antibiotic prescription by health care providers, especially AYUSH doctors, needs to be restricted given the high number of antibiotics per prescription. This will limit the indiscriminate use of antibiotics and may be a big step towards achieving the antibiotic stewardship goal.

scholarly journals Performance associated effect variations of public reporting in promoting antibiotic prescribing practice: a cluster randomized-controlled trial in primary healthcare settings

2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (05) ◽  
pp. 482-491 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuqing Tang ◽  
Chenxi Liu ◽  
Xinping Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Primary Healthcare ◽  
Antibiotic Prescription ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Public Reporting ◽  
Antibiotic Prescribing ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Healthcare Settings ◽  
Prescribing Practice ◽  
Cluster Randomized

Aim To evaluate the variations in effect of public reporting in antibiotic prescribing practice among physicians with different performance in primary healthcare settings. Background Overprovision of antibiotics is a major public health concern. Public reporting has been adopted to encourage good antibiotic prescribing practices. However, which group, for instance, high, average or low antibiotic prescribers, accounted for antibiotic prescription reduction has not been fully understood. Methods A cluster randomized-controlled trial was conducted. In total, 20 primary healthcare institutions in Qianjiang city were paired through a six indicators-synthesized score. Coin flipping was used to assign control–intervention status; 10 were then subjected to intervention where prescription indicators were publicly reported monthly over a one-year period. Prescriptions for upper respiratory tract infections (URTIs) before and after the intervention were collected. Physicians were divided into high, average and low antibiotic prescribers based on their antibiotic prescribing rates last month, which were publicly reported in intervention arm. Multilevel difference-in-differences logit regressions were performed to estimate intervention effect in each physician group on three outcome indicators: prescriptions containing antibiotics, two or more antibiotics and antibiotic injections. Findings In total, 31 460 URTI prescriptions were collected (16 170 in intervention arm and 15 290 in control arm). Reduction in antibiotic prescription attributed to intervention was 2.82% [95% confidence intervals (CI): −4.09, −1.54%, P&lt;0.001], least significant in low prescribers (−1.41%, 95% CI: −3.81, 0.99%, P=0.249) and most significant in average prescribers (−5.01%, 95% CI: −6.94, −3.07%, P&lt;0.001). Reduction in combined antibiotics prescriptions attributed to intervention was 3.81% (95% CI: −5.23, −2.39%, P&lt;0.001), least significant in low prescribers (−2.42%, 95% CI: −4.39, −0.45%, P=0.016) and most significant in average prescribers (−5.01%, 95% CI: −7.47, −2.56%, P&lt;0.001). Conclusion Public reporting can positively influence antibiotic prescribing patterns of physicians for URTIs in primary care settings, with reduction in antibiotic and combined antibiotic prescriptions. The reduction was mainly attributed to average and high antibiotic prescribers.

scholarly journals 2065. Reducing Inappropriate Antibiotic Prescriptions in the Primary Care Setting

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. S696-S696
Author(s):  
Marlena Klein ◽  
Diana Zackey ◽  
Niharika Sathe ◽  
Ayobamidele S Balogun ◽  
Mona Domadia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Antibiotic Prescription ◽  
Average Rate ◽  
Primary Care Providers ◽  
Prescribing Patterns ◽  
Resistant Bacteria ◽  
Antibiotic Prescribing ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Office Visits ◽  
Post Intervention

Abstract Background In 2015, the CDC established the National Action Plan for Combating Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria, with the goal of reducing inappropriate outpatient antibiotic use by 50% by 2020. Upper respiratory infections, (URIs) account for one of the top three diagnoses prompting outpatient visits, and despite viral pathogens being the etiology of most URIs, many patients are treated with antibiotics. This study aimed to reduce inappropriate antibiotics prescribing for URIs at Cooper Primary Care offices. Methods Using the electronic medical record, we analyzed office visits (OVs) of 63 primary care providers during the influenza season (November 1, 2017–February 28, 2018) that were associated with a URI diagnosis code and resulted in an antibiotic prescription. The intervention was a personalized digital URI score card (Figure 1) emailed to each primary care physician. It included (1) Cooper Hospitals’ Primary Care Department Average Rate of Antibiotic Prescribing for URI OVs and (2) each physician’s average rate of antibiotic prescribing for URI office visits. Data were collected post-intervention (November 1, 2018–February 28, 2019) to evaluate for changes in antibiotic prescribing patterns. Results Using Fischer’s Exact test we analyzed the pre vs. post-intervention rate of antibiotic prescribing for URI OVs. There were 7,295 total pre-intervention office visits. Of these, 41.03% resulted in an antibiotic prescription. There were 6,642 total post-intervention office visits. Of these, 35.85% resulted in an antibiotic prescription. There was a 5.18% overall decrease in antibiotics prescribed for all URI office visits (P < 0.001) (see Figure 2). Conclusion Increasing providers’ awareness of their own prescribing patterns compared with their department’s prescribing patterns utilizing a single report card decreased the rate of antibiotics prescribed for URIs by 5.18% for all URI-related office visits. Specifically, there was 10.19% decrease in antibiotics prescribed for bronchitis, which is by definition, of viral etiology. This is significant given the potential side-effects of unnecessary antibiotics, and the emergence of antibiotic resistance. Limitations include a lack of certainty in “true” inappropriate prescriptions and diagnosis coding. Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures.

scholarly journals 220. Comparing Antibiotic Prescription Practices, and Provider’s Perceptions of Such Rates, Among Urgent Care and Non-Urgent Care Clinicians at One of the Nation’s Largest Federally Qualified Health Centers

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S111-S112
Author(s):  
Ramzi W Ben-Yelles ◽  
Brittany Hopkins ◽  
Sherrill Brown ◽  
Sonali Saluja
Keyword(s):  
Antibiotic Prescription ◽  
Inappropriate Prescribing ◽  
The United States ◽  
Health Centers ◽  
Urgent Care ◽  
Antibiotic Prescribing ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Prescribing Practices ◽  
Federally Qualified Health Centers ◽  
Prescription Practices

Abstract Background Inappropriate antibiotic prescribing practices, and the resulting development of antibiotic resistance, contribute to a growing health emergency worldwide. In reviewing data from 2010–2011, it was estimated that over 30% of ambulatory antibiotic prescriptions in the United States are non-essential.1 Altamed, one of the nation’s largest federally qualified health centers, operates 21 clinics across Southern California and serves the primary care needs of a high-volume, socioeconomically disadvantaged, predominantly Hispanic population. Citation 1 Methods We conducted an evaluation on the inappropriate antibiotic prescribing rate for Upper Respiratory Infections (URI) among all providers at Altamed (n=400). We limited our scope of encounters to cases of uncomplicated, acute bronchitis (URI) that occurred between January and December 2018. ICD 10 codes identified URIs, with exclusion criteria limiting confounding variables, charting errors, and dual diagnoses. Additionally, provider perceptions and mechanism for their antibiotic prescription practices were assessed with a de-identified 17 question, Likert-scale assessment (n=90). Results Of the encounters for URI seen by urgent care providers, 11.09% had inappropriate antibiotic prescriptions written. This is significantly different from encounters by non-urgent care providers, where 9.13% were deemed inappropriate (p=0.016). Despite this, providers were not uniform in believing their own antibiotic prescription rates to be as successful, with many estimating that their rate of CDC guideline concordance to fall below 90%. However, in their survey responses, providers as a whole report following healthy prescribing practices, identifying needs in their communities to recognize when it was inappropriate to prescribe an antibiotic, though they requested increased access to and education on antibiograms. Graph 1 Table 1 Graph 2 Conclusion Our study limitations included uneven or incomplete charting, the narrow time frame of the study, and the limited survey response rate of Altamed providers. Nevertheless, we are able to ascertain that inappropriate prescribing practices continue to be a challenge in the outpatient setting and are of greater concern among urgent care providers. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

scholarly journals A Descriptive Analysis of Outpatient Antimicrobial Use for Urinary Tract Infections in Virginia

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (S1) ◽  
pp. s453-s454
Author(s):  
Hasti Mazdeyasna ◽  
Shaina Bernard ◽  
Le Kang ◽  
Emily Godbout ◽  
Kimberly Lee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Urinary Tract ◽  
Urinary Tract Infections ◽  
Private Insurance ◽  
Geographic Region ◽  
Study Cohort ◽  
Antibiotic Prescribing ◽  
Prescribing Trends ◽  
Icd 10 ◽  
Tract Infections ◽  
Insurance Payer

Background: Data regarding outpatient antibiotic prescribing for urinary tract infections (UTIs) are limited, and they have never been formally summarized in Virginia. Objective: We describe outpatient antibiotic prescribing trends for UTIs based on gender, age, geographic region, insurance payer and International Classification of Disease, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) codes in Virginia. Methods: We used the Virginia All-Payer Claims Database (APCD), administered by Virginia Health Information (VHI), which holds data for Medicare, Medicaid, and private insurance. The study cohort included Virginia residents who had a primary diagnosis of UTI, had an antibiotic claim 0–3 days after the date of the diagnosis and who were seen in an outpatient facility in Virginia between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2016. A diagnosis of UTI was categorized as cystitis, urethritis or pyelonephritis and was defined using the following ICD-10 codes: N30.0, N30.00, N30.01, N30.9, N30.90, N30.91, N39.0, N34.1, N34.2, and N10. The following antibiotics were prescribed: aminoglycosides, sulfamethoxazole/trimethoprim (TMP-SMX), cephalosporins, fluoroquinolones, macrolides, penicillins, tetracyclines, or nitrofurantoin. Patients were categorized based on gender, age, location, insurance payer and UTI type. We used χ2 and Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel testing. Analyses were performed in SAS version 9.4 software (SAS Institute, Cary, NC). Results: In total, 15,580 patients were included in this study. Prescriptions for antibiotics by drug class differed significantly by gender (P < .0001), age (P < .0001), geographic region (P < .0001), insurance payer (P < .0001), and UTI type (P < .0001). Cephalosporins were prescribed more often to women (32.48%, 4,173 of 12,846) than to men (26.26%, 718 of 2,734), and fluoroquinolones were prescribed more often to men (53.88%, 1,473 of 2,734) than to women (47.91%, 6,155 of 12,846). Although cephalosporins were prescribed most frequently (42.58%, 557 of 1,308) in northern Virginia, fluoroquinolones were prescribed the most in eastern Virginia (50.76%, 1677 of 3,304). Patients with commercial health insurance, Medicaid, and Medicare were prescribed fluoroquinolones (39.31%, 1,149 of 2,923), cephalosporins (56.33%, 1,326 of 2,354), and fluoroquinolones (57.36%, 5,910 of 10,303) most frequently, respectively. Conclusions: Antibiotic prescribing trends for UTIs varied by gender, age, geographic region, payer status and UTI type in the state of Virginia. These data will inform future statewide antimicrobial stewardship efforts.Funding: NoneDisclosures: Michelle Doll reports a research grant from Molnlycke Healthcare.

scholarly journals 145. Monthly Antibiotic Prescribing Peer Comparison Combined with In-person Education Decreases Antibiotic Prescribing for Acute Respiratory Infections

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S83-S83
Author(s):  
Shelby J Kolo ◽  
David J Taber ◽  
Ronald G Washburn ◽  
Katherine A Pleasants
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Respiratory Infections ◽  
Primary Care Providers ◽  
The United States ◽  
Delivery Mode ◽  
Antibiotic Prescribing ◽  
Acute Respiratory Infections ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Intervention Period ◽  
Provider Education

Abstract Background Inappropriate antibiotic prescribing is an important modifiable risk factor for antibiotic resistance. Approximately half of all antibiotics prescribed for acute respiratory infections (ARIs) in the United States may be inappropriate or unnecessary. The purpose of this quality improvement (QI) project was to evaluate the effect of three consecutive interventions on improving antibiotic prescribing for ARIs (i.e., pharyngitis, rhinosinusitis, bronchitis, common cold). Methods This was a pre-post analysis of an antimicrobial stewardship QI initiative to improve antibiotic prescribing for ARIs in six Veterans Affairs (VA) primary care clinics. Three distinct intervention phases occurred. Educational interventions included training on appropriate antibiotic prescribing for ARIs. During the first intervention period (8/2017-1/2019), education was presented virtually to primary care providers on a single occasion. In the second intervention period (2/2019-10/2019), in-person education with peer comparison was presented on a single occasion. In the third intervention period (11/2019-4/2020), education and prescribing feedback with peer comparison was presented once in-person followed by monthly emails of prescribing feedback with peer comparison. January 2016-July 2017 was used as a pre-intervention baseline period. The primary outcome was the antibiotic prescribing rate for all classifications of ARIs. Secondary outcomes included adherence to antibiotic prescribing guidance for pharyngitis and rhinosinusitis. Descriptive statistics and interrupted time series segmented regression were used to analyze the outcomes. Results Monthly antibiotic prescribing peer comparison emails in combination with in-person education was associated with a statistically significant 12.5% reduction in the rate of antibiotic prescribing for ARIs (p=0.0019). When provider education alone was used, the reduction in antibiotic prescribing was nonsignificant. Conclusion Education alone does not significantly reduce antibiotic prescribing for ARIs, regardless of the delivery mode. In contrast, education followed by monthly prescribing feedback with peer comparison was associated with a statistically significant reduction in ARI antibiotic prescribing rates. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

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

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

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document