Evaluation of antibiotics returned for safe disposal during and after a community pharmacy antibiotic amnesty campaign.

IF 3.7 Q2 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
JAC-Antimicrobial Resistance Pub Date : 2024-10-24 eCollection Date: 2024-10-01 DOI:10.1093/jacamr/dlae172
Ryan A Hamilton, Marco G Ercolani, Rakhi Aggarwal, Donna Cooper, Sam Kelly, Helen Root, Kunjal Pabari, Conor Jamieson
{"title":"Evaluation of antibiotics returned for safe disposal during and after a community pharmacy antibiotic amnesty campaign.","authors":"Ryan A Hamilton, Marco G Ercolani, Rakhi Aggarwal, Donna Cooper, Sam Kelly, Helen Root, Kunjal Pabari, Conor Jamieson","doi":"10.1093/jacamr/dlae172","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Community pharmacies in England offer convenient and safe disposal of unwanted medicines, including antimicrobials, and better uptake of this service could limit environmental antimicrobial resistance. However, there is limited information on the extent and nature of antibiotic returns to community pharmacies. The impact of an antibiotic amnesty campaign promoting antibiotic disposal through community pharmacies was evaluated with the intention of collecting detailed information on the antibiotics returned.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An antibiotic amnesty campaign was delivered by community pharmacies in the Midlands (England) with an audit of returned antibiotics conducted in 19 community pharmacies in Leicestershire. Detailed information on antibiotics returned for disposal was gathered during the month-long amnesty campaign and again 3 months later in the same pharmacies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Antibiotics accounted for 3.12%-3.35% of all returned medicines. The amnesty campaign led to a significant increase in defined daily doses of returned antibiotics compared to the post-amnesty period (<i>P </i>= 0.0165), but there was no difference in the overall number of returned medicines. Penicillins were the most commonly returned antibiotics in both periods (29.3% and 42.5% of packs, respectively), while solid oral dose formulations predominated. A total of 36.6% of antibiotics returned during the amnesty period were expired, increasing to 53.4% in the post-amnesty period. Amnesty conversations had a significant impact on the number of antibiotic returns but campaign posters did not.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Antibiotic conversations can increase the amount of antibiotics returned to community pharmacies for safe disposal, and passive campaign materials had limited impact. More research is needed to identify the most effective interventions to increase returns.</p>","PeriodicalId":14594,"journal":{"name":"JAC-Antimicrobial Resistance","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11503646/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JAC-Antimicrobial Resistance","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jacamr/dlae172","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Community pharmacies in England offer convenient and safe disposal of unwanted medicines, including antimicrobials, and better uptake of this service could limit environmental antimicrobial resistance. However, there is limited information on the extent and nature of antibiotic returns to community pharmacies. The impact of an antibiotic amnesty campaign promoting antibiotic disposal through community pharmacies was evaluated with the intention of collecting detailed information on the antibiotics returned.

Methods: An antibiotic amnesty campaign was delivered by community pharmacies in the Midlands (England) with an audit of returned antibiotics conducted in 19 community pharmacies in Leicestershire. Detailed information on antibiotics returned for disposal was gathered during the month-long amnesty campaign and again 3 months later in the same pharmacies.

Results: Antibiotics accounted for 3.12%-3.35% of all returned medicines. The amnesty campaign led to a significant increase in defined daily doses of returned antibiotics compared to the post-amnesty period (P = 0.0165), but there was no difference in the overall number of returned medicines. Penicillins were the most commonly returned antibiotics in both periods (29.3% and 42.5% of packs, respectively), while solid oral dose formulations predominated. A total of 36.6% of antibiotics returned during the amnesty period were expired, increasing to 53.4% in the post-amnesty period. Amnesty conversations had a significant impact on the number of antibiotic returns but campaign posters did not.

Conclusions: Antibiotic conversations can increase the amount of antibiotics returned to community pharmacies for safe disposal, and passive campaign materials had limited impact. More research is needed to identify the most effective interventions to increase returns.

在社区药房开展抗生素大赦活动期间和之后,对安全处置退回的抗生素进行评估。
背景:英格兰的社区药房可以方便、安全地处理包括抗菌药在内的不需要的药品,更好地利用这项服务可以限制环境中的抗菌药耐药性。然而,有关社区药房回收抗生素的范围和性质的信息却很有限。为了收集有关退还抗生素的详细信息,我们对通过社区药房促进抗生素处理的抗生素特赦活动的影响进行了评估:方法:英格兰中部地区的社区药房开展了抗生素特赦活动,并对莱斯特郡的 19 家社区药房退回的抗生素进行了审计。在为期一个月的大赦活动期间,收集了关于退回处理的抗生素的详细信息,3 个月后,在相同的药房再次收集了这些信息:结果:抗生素占所有退回药品的 3.12%-3.35% 。与大赦后相比,大赦活动导致退还的抗生素的日界定剂量显著增加(P = 0.0165),但退还的药品总数没有差异。青霉素类药物是两个时期最常被退回的抗生素(分别占退回药包的 29.3% 和 42.5%),固体口服制剂占多数。大赦期间退回的抗生素中共有 36.6%是过期抗生素,大赦后增加到 53.4%。大赦谈话对退还抗生素的数量有显著影响,但宣传海报没有影响:结论:抗生素谈话可以增加退回社区药房安全处置的抗生素数量,而被动的宣传材料影响有限。需要开展更多的研究,以确定最有效的干预措施,从而增加退药数量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信