Feasibility of a Low-Intensity Intervention to Influence Antibiotic Prescribing Rates Use in Outpatient Settings: A Cluster Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial.

IF 3.8 4区 医学 Q2 IMMUNOLOGY
Open Forum Infectious Diseases Pub Date : 2024-12-16 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1093/ofid/ofae725
Taissa A Bej, Brigid M Wilson, Ukwen C Akpoji, Nicole Mongilardi, Tayoot Todd Chengsupanimit, Sunah Song, Corinne Kowal, Krysttel C Stryczek, Rene Hearns, Mark Honsberger, Tai-Lyn Wilkerson, Christine Firestone, Soumya Subramaniam, Lauren Stevenson, Sherry L Ball, Robin L P Jump, Federico Perez
{"title":"Feasibility of a Low-Intensity Intervention to Influence Antibiotic Prescribing Rates Use in Outpatient Settings: A Cluster Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial.","authors":"Taissa A Bej, Brigid M Wilson, Ukwen C Akpoji, Nicole Mongilardi, Tayoot Todd Chengsupanimit, Sunah Song, Corinne Kowal, Krysttel C Stryczek, Rene Hearns, Mark Honsberger, Tai-Lyn Wilkerson, Christine Firestone, Soumya Subramaniam, Lauren Stevenson, Sherry L Ball, Robin L P Jump, Federico Perez","doi":"10.1093/ofid/ofae725","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Primary care providers (PCPs) may modify their antibiotic prescription practices if aware of their potentially damaging impact.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a cluster randomized controlled trial at 12 Veterans Affairs community-based outpatient clinics. PCPs at clinics randomized to the intervention group received quarterly antibiotic use reports with feedback about antibiotics prescribed for acute respiratory infections and adverse event letters alerting about <i>Clostridioides difficile</i> infection or antibiotic-resistant gram-negative bacteria among their patients. The main outcome, antibiotic prescriptions in primary care visits, was compared in the preintervention (April-September 2020), intervention (October 2020 to September 2021), and postintervention periods (September 2021 to September 2022).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 52 PCPs at 6 clinics in the intervention group, 66% (33 of 52) and 54% (28 of 52) received ≥1 antibiotic use report and adverse event letter. In the intervention clinics, the proportion of primary care visits with antibiotic prescription during the preintervention, intervention, and postintervention periods was 1.4% (1088 of 77 697), 1.4% (2051 of 147 858), and 1.3% (1692 of 131 530). In the control clinics, this increased from 1.8% (1560 of 87 897) to 2.1% (3707 of 176 825) and 2.1% (3418 of 162 979), respectively, during the intervention and postintervention periods. The rate of visits with antibiotic prescription did not differ in the preintervention period (odds ratio [95% confidence interval], 1.10 [.87-1.39); <i>P</i> = .43) but did during the intervention (1.30 [1.04-1.62]; <i>P</i> = .022) and postintervention periods (1.38 [1.09-1.74]; <i>P</i> = .007). There were no differences in emergency department visits and hospitalizations.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>PCPs from clinics assigned to a low-intensity intervention combining comparative feedback with adverse event notifications had lower antibiotic prescription rates.</p>","PeriodicalId":19517,"journal":{"name":"Open Forum Infectious Diseases","volume":"12 1","pages":"ofae725"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11697152/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Open Forum Infectious Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofae725","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"IMMUNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Primary care providers (PCPs) may modify their antibiotic prescription practices if aware of their potentially damaging impact.

Methods: We conducted a cluster randomized controlled trial at 12 Veterans Affairs community-based outpatient clinics. PCPs at clinics randomized to the intervention group received quarterly antibiotic use reports with feedback about antibiotics prescribed for acute respiratory infections and adverse event letters alerting about Clostridioides difficile infection or antibiotic-resistant gram-negative bacteria among their patients. The main outcome, antibiotic prescriptions in primary care visits, was compared in the preintervention (April-September 2020), intervention (October 2020 to September 2021), and postintervention periods (September 2021 to September 2022).

Results: Among 52 PCPs at 6 clinics in the intervention group, 66% (33 of 52) and 54% (28 of 52) received ≥1 antibiotic use report and adverse event letter. In the intervention clinics, the proportion of primary care visits with antibiotic prescription during the preintervention, intervention, and postintervention periods was 1.4% (1088 of 77 697), 1.4% (2051 of 147 858), and 1.3% (1692 of 131 530). In the control clinics, this increased from 1.8% (1560 of 87 897) to 2.1% (3707 of 176 825) and 2.1% (3418 of 162 979), respectively, during the intervention and postintervention periods. The rate of visits with antibiotic prescription did not differ in the preintervention period (odds ratio [95% confidence interval], 1.10 [.87-1.39); P = .43) but did during the intervention (1.30 [1.04-1.62]; P = .022) and postintervention periods (1.38 [1.09-1.74]; P = .007). There were no differences in emergency department visits and hospitalizations.

Conclusions: PCPs from clinics assigned to a low-intensity intervention combining comparative feedback with adverse event notifications had lower antibiotic prescription rates.

低强度干预影响门诊抗生素处方率的可行性:一项随机对照临床试验。
背景:初级保健提供者(pcp)可能会修改他们的抗生素处方做法,如果意识到其潜在的破坏性影响。方法:我们在12个退伍军人事务社区门诊进行了一项随机对照试验。随机分配到干预组的诊所的pcp每季度收到抗生素使用报告,报告中有关于急性呼吸道感染的抗生素处方的反馈,以及患者中关于艰难梭菌感染或耐药革兰氏阴性菌的不良事件信函。比较了干预前(2020年4月至9月)、干预(2020年10月至2021年9月)和干预后(2021年9月至2022年9月)的主要结局——初级保健就诊中的抗生素处方。结果:干预组6个诊所的52名pcp中,66%(33 / 52)和54%(28 / 52)的pcp收到了≥1份抗生素使用报告和不良事件信。在干预前、干预和干预后的初级保健就诊中,处方抗生素的比例分别为1.4%(77 697例中1088例)、1.4%(147 858例中2051例)和1.3%(131 530例中1692例)。在对照诊所,在干预期间和干预后,这一比例分别从1.8%(87 897例中的1560例)增加到2.1%(176 825例中的3707例)和2.1%(162 979例中的3418例)。抗生素处方就诊率在干预前无差异(优势比[95%置信区间],1.10 [.87-1.39];P = .43),但在干预期间(1.30 [1.04-1.62];P = 0.022)和干预后时间(1.38 [1.09-1.74];P = .007)。在急诊科就诊和住院方面没有差异。结论:来自被分配到低强度干预结合比较反馈和不良事件通知的诊所的pcp的抗生素处方率较低。
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
Open Forum Infectious Diseases
Open Forum Infectious Diseases Medicine-Neurology (clinical)
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
4.80%
发文量
630
审稿时长
9 weeks
期刊介绍: Open Forum Infectious Diseases provides a global forum for the publication of clinical, translational, and basic research findings in a fully open access, online journal environment. The journal reflects the broad diversity of the field of infectious diseases, and focuses on the intersection of biomedical science and clinical practice, with a particular emphasis on knowledge that holds the potential to improve patient care in populations around the world. Fully peer-reviewed, OFID supports the international community of infectious diseases experts by providing a venue for articles that further the understanding of all aspects of infectious diseases.
×
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