Optimizing responsiveness to feedback about antibiotic prescribing in primary care: protocol for two interrelated randomized implementation trials with embedded process evaluations.

Jennifer Shuldiner, Kevin L Schwartz, Bradley J Langford, Noah M Ivers
{"title":"Optimizing responsiveness to feedback about antibiotic prescribing in primary care: protocol for two interrelated randomized implementation trials with embedded process evaluations.","authors":"Jennifer Shuldiner,&nbsp;Kevin L Schwartz,&nbsp;Bradley J Langford,&nbsp;Noah M Ivers","doi":"10.1186/s13012-022-01194-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Audit and feedback (A&F) that shows how health professionals compare to those of their peers, can be an effective intervention to reduce unnecessary antibiotic prescribing among family physicians. However, the most impactful design approach to A&F to achieve this aim is uncertain. We will test three design modifications of antibiotic A&F that could be readily scaled and sustained if shown to be effective: (1) inclusion of case-mix-adjusted peer comparator versus a crude comparator, (2) emphasizing harms, rather than lack of benefits, and (3) providing a viral prescription pad.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We will conduct two interrelated pragmatic randomized trials in January 2021. One trial will include family physicians in Ontario who have signed up to receive their MyPractice: Primary Care report from Ontario Health (\"OH Trial\"). These physicians will be cluster-randomized by practice, 1:1 to intervention or control. The intervention group will also receive a Viral Prescription Pad mailed to their office as well as added emphasis in their report on use of the pad. Ontario family physicians who have not signed up to receive their MyPractice: Primary Care report will be included in the other trial administered by Public Health Ontario (\"PHO Trial\"). These physicians will be allocated 4:1 to intervention or control. The intervention group will be further randomized by two factors: case-mix adjusted versus unadjusted comparator and emphasis or not on harms of antibiotics. Physicians in the intervention arm of this trial will receive one of four versions of a personalized antibiotic A&F letter from PHO. For both trials, the primary outcome is the antibiotic prescribing rate per 1000 patient visits, measured at 6 months post-randomization, the primary analysis will use Poisson regression and we will follow the intention to treat principle. A mixed-methods process evaluation will use surveys and interviews with family physicians to explore potential mechanisms underlying the observed effects, exploring targeted constructs including intention, self-efficacy, outcome expectancies, descriptive norms, and goal prioritization.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>This protocol describes the rationale and methodology of two interrelated pragmatic trials testing variations of theory-informed components of an audit and feedback intervention to determine how to optimize A&F interventions for antibiotic prescribing in primary care.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>NCT04594200, NCT05044052. CIHR Grant ID: 398514.</p>","PeriodicalId":417097,"journal":{"name":"Implementation Science : IS","volume":" ","pages":"17"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8842929/pdf/","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Implementation Science : IS","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-022-01194-8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Background: Audit and feedback (A&F) that shows how health professionals compare to those of their peers, can be an effective intervention to reduce unnecessary antibiotic prescribing among family physicians. However, the most impactful design approach to A&F to achieve this aim is uncertain. We will test three design modifications of antibiotic A&F that could be readily scaled and sustained if shown to be effective: (1) inclusion of case-mix-adjusted peer comparator versus a crude comparator, (2) emphasizing harms, rather than lack of benefits, and (3) providing a viral prescription pad.

Methods: We will conduct two interrelated pragmatic randomized trials in January 2021. One trial will include family physicians in Ontario who have signed up to receive their MyPractice: Primary Care report from Ontario Health ("OH Trial"). These physicians will be cluster-randomized by practice, 1:1 to intervention or control. The intervention group will also receive a Viral Prescription Pad mailed to their office as well as added emphasis in their report on use of the pad. Ontario family physicians who have not signed up to receive their MyPractice: Primary Care report will be included in the other trial administered by Public Health Ontario ("PHO Trial"). These physicians will be allocated 4:1 to intervention or control. The intervention group will be further randomized by two factors: case-mix adjusted versus unadjusted comparator and emphasis or not on harms of antibiotics. Physicians in the intervention arm of this trial will receive one of four versions of a personalized antibiotic A&F letter from PHO. For both trials, the primary outcome is the antibiotic prescribing rate per 1000 patient visits, measured at 6 months post-randomization, the primary analysis will use Poisson regression and we will follow the intention to treat principle. A mixed-methods process evaluation will use surveys and interviews with family physicians to explore potential mechanisms underlying the observed effects, exploring targeted constructs including intention, self-efficacy, outcome expectancies, descriptive norms, and goal prioritization.

Discussion: This protocol describes the rationale and methodology of two interrelated pragmatic trials testing variations of theory-informed components of an audit and feedback intervention to determine how to optimize A&F interventions for antibiotic prescribing in primary care.

Trial registration: NCT04594200, NCT05044052. CIHR Grant ID: 398514.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

优化对初级保健中抗生素处方反馈的反应性:两个相互关联的随机实施试验的方案,并进行嵌入式过程评估。
背景:审计和反馈(A&F)显示了卫生专业人员与同行的比较,可以有效地减少家庭医生不必要的抗生素处方。然而,实现这一目标的最有效的A&F设计方法是不确定的。我们将测试抗生素A&F的三种设计修改,如果证明有效,这些设计修改可以很容易地扩展和维持:(1)包括病例混合调整的同行比较器而不是粗糙的比较器,(2)强调危害,而不是缺乏益处,(3)提供病毒处方纸。方法:我们将于2021年1月进行两项相关的实用随机试验。一项试验将包括安大略省的家庭医生,他们已经注册接收来自安大略省卫生部的MyPractice:初级保健报告(“OH试验”)。这些医生将按实践分组随机,按1:1比例进行干预或控制。干预组还将收到一封邮寄到他们办公室的病毒处方垫,并在他们的报告中强调使用垫的重要性。安大略的家庭医生如果没有注册接受他们的MyPractice: Primary Care报告,将被纳入由安大略公共卫生部管理的另一项试验(“PHO试验”)。这些医生将以4:1的比例分配到干预组和对照组。干预组将进一步根据病例组合调整与未调整比较指标、是否强调抗生素危害这两个因素进行随机化。该试验干预组的医生将收到来自PHO的个性化抗生素A&F信的四个版本之一。对于这两项试验,主要结局是每1000名患者就诊的抗生素处方率,在随机化后6个月测量,主要分析将使用泊松回归,我们将遵循意向治疗原则。混合方法过程评估将使用调查和家庭医生访谈来探索观察到的效果的潜在机制,探索目标结构,包括意图,自我效能感,结果预期,描述性规范和目标优先级。讨论:本方案描述了两个相互关联的实用试验的基本原理和方法,这些试验测试了审计和反馈干预的理论知情成分的变化,以确定如何优化初级保健抗生素处方的A&F干预。试验注册:NCT04594200, NCT05044052。CIHR授权ID: 398514。
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
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信