比较抗生素处方的临床医生之间在英国初级保健:在队列研究的分析八种不同措施的抗生素处方

Tjeerd Van Staa, Yan Li, Natalie Gold, Tim Chadborn, William Welfare, Victoria Palin, Darren M Ashcroft, Joanna Bircher
{"title":"比较抗生素处方的临床医生之间在英国初级保健:在队列研究的分析八种不同措施的抗生素处方","authors":"Tjeerd Van Staa, Yan Li, Natalie Gold, Tim Chadborn, William Welfare, Victoria Palin, Darren M Ashcroft, Joanna Bircher","doi":"10.1136/bmjqs-2020-012108","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There is a need to reduce antimicrobial uses in humans. Previous studies have found variations in antibiotic (AB) prescribing between practices in primary care. This study assessed variability of AB prescribing between clinicians.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Clinical Practice Research Datalink, which collects electronic health records in primary care, was used to select anonymised clinicians providing 500+ consultations during 2012-2017. Eight measures of AB prescribing were assessed, such as overall and incidental AB prescribing, repeat AB courses and extent of risk-based prescribing. Poisson regression models with random effect for clinicians were fitted.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>6111 clinicians from 466 general practices were included. Considerable variability between individual clinicians was found for most AB measures. For example, the rate of AB prescribing varied between 77.4 and 350.3 per 1000 consultations; percentage of repeat AB courses within 30 days ranged from 13.1% to 34.3%; predicted patient risk of hospital admission for infection-related complications in those prescribed AB ranged from 0.03% to 0.32% (5th and 95th percentiles). The adjusted relative rate between clinicians in rates of AB prescribing was 5.23. Weak correlation coefficients (<0.5) were found between most AB measures. There was considerable variability in case mix seen by clinicians. The largest potential impact to reduce AB prescribing could be around encouraging risk-based prescribing and addressing repeat issues of ABs. Reduction of repeat AB courses to prescribing habit of median clinician would save 21 813 AB prescriptions per 1000 clinicians per year.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The wide variation seen in all measures of AB prescribing and weak correlation between them suggests that a single AB measure, such as prescribing rate, is not sufficient to underpin the optimisation of AB prescribing.</p>","PeriodicalId":49653,"journal":{"name":"Quality & Safety in Health Care","volume":"31 1","pages":"831-838"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9606525/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparing antibiotic prescribing between clinicians in UK primary care: an analysis in a cohort study of eight different measures of antibiotic prescribing.\",\"authors\":\"Tjeerd Van Staa, Yan Li, Natalie Gold, Tim Chadborn, William Welfare, Victoria Palin, Darren M Ashcroft, Joanna Bircher\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/bmjqs-2020-012108\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There is a need to reduce antimicrobial uses in humans. Previous studies have found variations in antibiotic (AB) prescribing between practices in primary care. This study assessed variability of AB prescribing between clinicians.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Clinical Practice Research Datalink, which collects electronic health records in primary care, was used to select anonymised clinicians providing 500+ consultations during 2012-2017. Eight measures of AB prescribing were assessed, such as overall and incidental AB prescribing, repeat AB courses and extent of risk-based prescribing. Poisson regression models with random effect for clinicians were fitted.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>6111 clinicians from 466 general practices were included. Considerable variability between individual clinicians was found for most AB measures. For example, the rate of AB prescribing varied between 77.4 and 350.3 per 1000 consultations; percentage of repeat AB courses within 30 days ranged from 13.1% to 34.3%; predicted patient risk of hospital admission for infection-related complications in those prescribed AB ranged from 0.03% to 0.32% (5th and 95th percentiles). The adjusted relative rate between clinicians in rates of AB prescribing was 5.23. Weak correlation coefficients (<0.5) were found between most AB measures. There was considerable variability in case mix seen by clinicians. The largest potential impact to reduce AB prescribing could be around encouraging risk-based prescribing and addressing repeat issues of ABs. Reduction of repeat AB courses to prescribing habit of median clinician would save 21 813 AB prescriptions per 1000 clinicians per year.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The wide variation seen in all measures of AB prescribing and weak correlation between them suggests that a single AB measure, such as prescribing rate, is not sufficient to underpin the optimisation of AB prescribing.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49653,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Quality & Safety in Health Care\",\"volume\":\"31 1\",\"pages\":\"831-838\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9606525/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Quality & Safety in Health Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2020-012108\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quality & Safety in Health Care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2020-012108","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景有必要减少人类对抗菌药物的使用。先前的研究发现,在初级保健实践中,抗生素(AB)处方存在差异。这项研究评估了临床医生之间AB处方的可变性。方法临床实践研究数据链接收集初级保健中的电子健康记录,用于选择2012-2017年间提供500+次咨询的匿名临床医生。评估了AB处方的八项指标,如总体和偶然AB处方、重复AB课程和基于风险的处方范围。拟合了临床医生具有随机效应的泊松回归模型。结果纳入466家全科诊所的6111名临床医生。大多数AB测量在个体临床医生之间发现了相当大的可变性。例如,AB处方率在每1000次咨询77.4至350.3之间变化;30天内重复AB疗程的比例为13.1%-34.3%;服用AB的患者因感染相关并发症入院的预测风险在0.03%-0.32%之间(第5和第95个百分位数)。临床医生之间AB处方率的调整相对比率为5.23。在大多数AB测量之间发现弱相关系数(<0.5)。临床医生看到的病例组合有相当大的可变性。减少AB处方的最大潜在影响可能是鼓励基于风险的处方和解决AB的重复问题。将重复AB课程减少到中等临床医生的处方习惯,每年每1000名临床医生将节省21813张AB处方。结论AB处方的所有指标差异很大,它们之间的相关性较弱,这表明单一的AB指标,如处方率,不足以支持AB处方的优化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparing antibiotic prescribing between clinicians in UK primary care: an analysis in a cohort study of eight different measures of antibiotic prescribing.

Background: There is a need to reduce antimicrobial uses in humans. Previous studies have found variations in antibiotic (AB) prescribing between practices in primary care. This study assessed variability of AB prescribing between clinicians.

Methods: Clinical Practice Research Datalink, which collects electronic health records in primary care, was used to select anonymised clinicians providing 500+ consultations during 2012-2017. Eight measures of AB prescribing were assessed, such as overall and incidental AB prescribing, repeat AB courses and extent of risk-based prescribing. Poisson regression models with random effect for clinicians were fitted.

Results: 6111 clinicians from 466 general practices were included. Considerable variability between individual clinicians was found for most AB measures. For example, the rate of AB prescribing varied between 77.4 and 350.3 per 1000 consultations; percentage of repeat AB courses within 30 days ranged from 13.1% to 34.3%; predicted patient risk of hospital admission for infection-related complications in those prescribed AB ranged from 0.03% to 0.32% (5th and 95th percentiles). The adjusted relative rate between clinicians in rates of AB prescribing was 5.23. Weak correlation coefficients (<0.5) were found between most AB measures. There was considerable variability in case mix seen by clinicians. The largest potential impact to reduce AB prescribing could be around encouraging risk-based prescribing and addressing repeat issues of ABs. Reduction of repeat AB courses to prescribing habit of median clinician would save 21 813 AB prescriptions per 1000 clinicians per year.

Conclusions: The wide variation seen in all measures of AB prescribing and weak correlation between them suggests that a single AB measure, such as prescribing rate, is not sufficient to underpin the optimisation of AB prescribing.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Quality & Safety in Health Care
Quality & Safety in Health Care 医学-卫生保健
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
>12 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