Evaluating academic detailing as an antibiotic stewardship intervention in primary healthcare settings in Croatia.

IF 2 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Darija Kuruc Poje, Domagoj Kifer, Maja Kuharić, Katarina Gvozdanović, Željka Draušnik, Ana Posavec Andrić, Vesna Mađarić, Vlatka Janeš Poje, Marina Payerl-Pal, Arjana Tambić Andrašević, Juraj Mark Poje, Vesna Bačić Vrca, Srećko Marušić
{"title":"Evaluating academic detailing as an antibiotic stewardship intervention in primary healthcare settings in Croatia.","authors":"Darija Kuruc Poje, Domagoj Kifer, Maja Kuharić, Katarina Gvozdanović, Željka Draušnik, Ana Posavec Andrić, Vesna Mađarić, Vlatka Janeš Poje, Marina Payerl-Pal, Arjana Tambić Andrašević, Juraj Mark Poje, Vesna Bačić Vrca, Srećko Marušić","doi":"10.1186/s12875-024-02679-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Acute respiratory tract infections are common in primary healthcare care settings and frequently result in antibiotic prescriptions, despite being primarily viral. There is scarcity of research examining impact of academic detailing (AD) intervention on prescribing practices for these infections in resource-constrained healthcare settings like southeastern Europe. Therefore aim of this study was to evaluate impact of AD intervention as an antimicrobial stewardship measure on antibiotic prescribing for acute respiratory tract infections in primary setting in Croatia which is located in southeastern Europe. Secondary goal included examining incidence of Clostridioides difficile infections (CDI) which are often associated with antibiotic consumption.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>AD intervention was implemented from 1st to 30th April 2020 and led by hospital healthcare professionals (infectious disease physician, clinical microbiology physician and clinical pharmacist). They focused on enhancing prescribing behaviors of primary care physicians (PCPs) by presenting local data, supplemented by examples from everyday practice, research and guidelines highlighting negative consequences of imprudent antibiotic use. This feasibility quasi-experimental study had two control groups in two counties. Impact of AD intervention was assessed by analyzing antibiotic prescription patterns using log-linear model, adjusting for seasonality. Study focused on prescribed daily defined doses (DDD) per day among PCPs pre-intervention (from 01st January 2018 to 31st March 2020) and post-intervention (from 1st May 2020 to 31st December 2022).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Data was collected from sixteen out of fifty-seven eligible PCPs with mean 29 years (SD 11.38) in practice. Statistically significant difference results (p < 0.05) favored AD intervention, leading to 30% decline in antibiotic prescribing in adjusted DDD per day for acute pharyngitis (21.14 post-intervention/30.27 pre-intervention), 33% decline for acute tonsilitis (24.91/37.38), 23% decline for acute upper respiratory infection (21.26/27.62) and 36% decline for acute bronchitis (8.13/12.77). Although there was 14% decline for acute sinusitis post-intervention, it did not reach statistical significance (30.96/35.93) (p = 0.617). Incidence of CDI cases decreased in investigated county while in control county stayed the same. Inter-county difference in these changes was not statistically significant (ratio = 0.749, 95% CI, 0.460-1.220; p = 0.246).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This feasibility study showed reductions in antibiotic prescribing for acute respiratory tract infections, emphasizing the efficacy of targeted, educator-led programs. Tailored healthcare strategies are vital, especially in Croatia and southeastern Europe, for promoting sustainable practices and addressing antimicrobial resistance challenges.</p>","PeriodicalId":72428,"journal":{"name":"BMC primary care","volume":"25 1","pages":"426"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11657582/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC primary care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-024-02679-9","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Acute respiratory tract infections are common in primary healthcare care settings and frequently result in antibiotic prescriptions, despite being primarily viral. There is scarcity of research examining impact of academic detailing (AD) intervention on prescribing practices for these infections in resource-constrained healthcare settings like southeastern Europe. Therefore aim of this study was to evaluate impact of AD intervention as an antimicrobial stewardship measure on antibiotic prescribing for acute respiratory tract infections in primary setting in Croatia which is located in southeastern Europe. Secondary goal included examining incidence of Clostridioides difficile infections (CDI) which are often associated with antibiotic consumption.

Methods: AD intervention was implemented from 1st to 30th April 2020 and led by hospital healthcare professionals (infectious disease physician, clinical microbiology physician and clinical pharmacist). They focused on enhancing prescribing behaviors of primary care physicians (PCPs) by presenting local data, supplemented by examples from everyday practice, research and guidelines highlighting negative consequences of imprudent antibiotic use. This feasibility quasi-experimental study had two control groups in two counties. Impact of AD intervention was assessed by analyzing antibiotic prescription patterns using log-linear model, adjusting for seasonality. Study focused on prescribed daily defined doses (DDD) per day among PCPs pre-intervention (from 01st January 2018 to 31st March 2020) and post-intervention (from 1st May 2020 to 31st December 2022).

Results: Data was collected from sixteen out of fifty-seven eligible PCPs with mean 29 years (SD 11.38) in practice. Statistically significant difference results (p < 0.05) favored AD intervention, leading to 30% decline in antibiotic prescribing in adjusted DDD per day for acute pharyngitis (21.14 post-intervention/30.27 pre-intervention), 33% decline for acute tonsilitis (24.91/37.38), 23% decline for acute upper respiratory infection (21.26/27.62) and 36% decline for acute bronchitis (8.13/12.77). Although there was 14% decline for acute sinusitis post-intervention, it did not reach statistical significance (30.96/35.93) (p = 0.617). Incidence of CDI cases decreased in investigated county while in control county stayed the same. Inter-county difference in these changes was not statistically significant (ratio = 0.749, 95% CI, 0.460-1.220; p = 0.246).

Conclusions: This feasibility study showed reductions in antibiotic prescribing for acute respiratory tract infections, emphasizing the efficacy of targeted, educator-led programs. Tailored healthcare strategies are vital, especially in Croatia and southeastern Europe, for promoting sustainable practices and addressing antimicrobial resistance challenges.

评估学术细节作为克罗地亚初级卫生保健机构抗生素管理干预措施。
背景:急性呼吸道感染在初级卫生保健机构中很常见,尽管主要是病毒性感染,但经常导致抗生素处方。在东南欧等资源有限的医疗环境中,学术详细(AD)干预对这些感染的处方实践影响的研究很少。因此,本研究的目的是评估AD干预作为抗菌药物管理措施对克罗地亚急性呼吸道感染抗生素处方的影响,克罗地亚位于欧洲东南部。次要目标包括检查艰难梭菌感染(CDI)的发生率,这通常与抗生素的使用有关。方法:2020年4月1日至30日,由医院卫生专业人员(传染病医师、临床微生物医师和临床药师)主导实施AD干预。他们通过提供当地数据,并辅以来自日常实践、研究和强调不谨慎使用抗生素的负面后果的指南的例子,重点关注加强初级保健医生(pcp)的处方行为。本可行性准实验研究在两个县设两个对照组。通过使用对数线性模型分析抗生素处方模式,并根据季节性因素进行调整,评估AD干预的影响。研究重点是干预前(2018年1月1日至2020年3月31日)和干预后(2020年5月1日至2022年12月31日)的pcp每天规定的每日规定剂量(DDD)。结果:数据来自57名符合条件的pcp中的16名,平均年龄为29岁(SD 11.38)。结论:这项可行性研究显示急性呼吸道感染的抗生素处方减少,强调了有针对性的、教育工作者主导的项目的有效性。量身定制的卫生保健战略对于促进可持续做法和应对抗菌素耐药性挑战至关重要,特别是在克罗地亚和东南欧。
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
4.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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