It is known that British
guidelines for otitis media support delayed antibiotic prescribing [1], and
other countries have guidelines to reduce certain antibiotic prescribing for
otitis media, for example, France [2]. Conversely, Finnish guidelines do not
[3]. A 2013 Norwegian study published in the British Journal of General Practice compares the varying effectiveness of 2 interventions in
delaying primary care antibiotic prescribing for respiratory tract infections,
including otitis [4].
Notwithstanding a complicated design
for recruiting and assigning general practitioners across multiple sites, this
article offers several interesting features. First, it compares an education-only
intervention with the same education enhanced by pop-up reminders of a
physician’s own prescribing patterns in the electronic medical record (EMR), a
nice reinforcement of the educational intervention for participating physicians.
While not a focus of this post, I would like to mention a new Penn study of adherence
to guidelines on otitis media using EMRs for decision support at Children’s
Hospital of Philadelphia [5]. This shows interest in implementation science combined
with continuing medical education (CME) for changing physicians’ practice
patterns.
The Norwegian study featured here [4] data collected and linked data on prescribed and dispensed
antibiotics from (a) 1 year before and (b) 1 year during the intervention,
which allowed prescribing practice patterns to be displayed to physicians in
the EMR at the point of prescribing antibiotics for a respiratory tract
infection. It also collected pharmacy fill rates by patients, which I find
interesting because it may offer insights into patients’ (or parents’)
agreement with the need for the prescription, after any access barriers to
medication adherence.
Both study arms showed slightly
reduced antibiotic prescribing from baseline (pre-intervention) rates: 1%
reduction vs. 4% reduction in “approximated risk” (risk ratio, RR) in the
education-only vs. education-plus-EMR study arms, respectively. Both results
report very tight ranges around a 95% confidence interval (CI), increasing
confidence in the findings. (It is further nice to see the CI reported instead
of the p value, for those who often
hesitate to report CI because of many readers’ greater familiarity with the p value.) While reporting of “risk ratio”
may be used as simply a convenient and appropriate way of reporting
epidemiological data, it seems to me that its use for reporting educational
outcomes with practice data is unusual and perhaps a comment on antibiotic
prescribing for these infections as a risk.
The authors find that upper
respiratory tract infection, sinusitis, and
otitis “gave highest odds for delayed prescribing and lowest odds for
dispensing,” which led them to conclude that the greatest potential for “savings”
is greatest for these infections, a comment that brings this CME study with implementation
science into the context of health utilization research. The article offers freely accessible full text,
so enjoy reading the study.
References cited:
1. Centre for Clinical Practice at NICE (UK). Respiratory Tract Infections - Antibiotic
Prescribing: Prescribing of Antibiotics for Self-Limiting Respiratory Tract
Infections in Adults and Children in Primary Care. London: National Institute
for Health and Clinical Excellence (UK); 2008 Jul. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0010014/.
2. Levy C, Pereira M, Guedj R, et al. Impact of 2011 French guidelines on antibiotic prescription for acute otitis media in infants. Médecine Mal Infect. 2014;44(3):102-106. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24630597.
3. [Update on current care guidelines: acute otitis media]. Duodecim. 2010;126(5):573-4. Finnish. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20597310.
4. Hoye S, Gjelstad S, Lindbaek M. Effects on antibiotic dispensing rates of interventions to promote delayed prescribing for respiratory tract infections in primary care. Br J Gen Pract. 2013;63(616):e777-e786. http://bjgp.org/content/63/616/e777.full.pdf. [Featured Article]
5. Fiks AG, Zhang P, Localio AR, et al. Adoption of electronic medical record-based decision support for otitis media in children. Health Serv Res. 2015;50(2):489-513. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25287670.
MeSH *Major* terms: Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use*; Education, Medical,
Continuing*; General Practice/statistics & numerical data*; Physician's
Practice Patterns/statistics & numerical data*; Respiratory Tract
Infections/drug therapy*
2. Levy C, Pereira M, Guedj R, et al. Impact of 2011 French guidelines on antibiotic prescription for acute otitis media in infants. Médecine Mal Infect. 2014;44(3):102-106. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24630597.
3. [Update on current care guidelines: acute otitis media]. Duodecim. 2010;126(5):573-4. Finnish. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20597310.
4. Hoye S, Gjelstad S, Lindbaek M. Effects on antibiotic dispensing rates of interventions to promote delayed prescribing for respiratory tract infections in primary care. Br J Gen Pract. 2013;63(616):e777-e786. http://bjgp.org/content/63/616/e777.full.pdf. [Featured Article]
5. Fiks AG, Zhang P, Localio AR, et al. Adoption of electronic medical record-based decision support for otitis media in children. Health Serv Res. 2015;50(2):489-513. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25287670.
No comments:
Post a Comment