Reducing antibiotic use for uncomplicated urinary tract infection in general practice by treatment with uva-ursi (REGATTA) - a double-blind, randomized, controlled comparative effectiveness trial.

BACKGROUND: Uncomplicated urinary tract infections (UTI) are common in general practice and usually treated with antibiotics. This contributes to increasing resistance rates of uropathogenic bacteria. A previous trial showed a reduction of antibiotic use in women with UTI by initial symptomatic treatment with ibuprofen. However, this treatment strategy is not suitable for all women equally. Arctostaphylos uva-ursi (UU, bearberry extract arbutin) is a potential alternative treatment. This study aims at investigating whether an initial treatment with UU in women with UTI can reduce antibiotic use without significantly increasing the symptom burden or rate of complications. METHODS: This is a double-blind, randomized, and controlled comparative effectiveness trial. Women between 18 and 75 years with suspected UTI and at least two of the symptoms dysuria, urgency, frequency or lower abdominal pain will be assessed for eligibility in general practice and enrolled into the trial. Participants will receive either a defined daily dose of 3 × 2 arbutin 105 mg for 5 days (intervention) or fosfomycin 3 g once (control). Antibiotic therapy will be provided in the intervention group only if needed, i.e. for women with worsening or persistent symptoms. Two co-primary outcomes are the number of all antibiotic courses regardless of the medical indication from day 0-28, and the symptom burden, defined as a weighted sum of the daily total symptom scores from day 0-7. The trial result is considered positive if superiority of initial treatment with UU is demonstrated with reference to the co-primary outcome number of antibiotic courses and non-inferiority of initial treatment with UU with reference to the co-primary outcome symptom burden. DISCUSSION: The trial's aim is to investigate whether initial treatment with UU is a safe and effective alternative treatment strategy in women with UTI. In that case, the results might change the existing treatment strategy in general practice by promoting delayed prescription of antibiotics and a reduction of antibiotic use in primary care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT: 2016-000477-21 . Clinical trials.gov: NCT03151603 (registered: 10 May 2017).

Do NHS GP surgeries employing GPs additionally trained in integrative or complementary medicine have lower antibiotic prescribing rates? Retrospective cross-sectional analysis of national primary care prescribing data in England in 2016.

OBJECTIVE: To determine differences in antibiotic prescription rates between conventional General Practice (GP) surgeries and GP surgeries employing general practitioners (GPs) additionally trained in integrative medicine (IM) or complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) (referred to as IM GPs) working within National Health Service (NHS) England. DESIGN: Retrospective study on antibiotic prescription rates per STAR-PU (Specific Therapeutic group Age-sex weighting Related Prescribing Unit) using NHS Digital data over 2016. Publicly available data were used on prevalence of relevant comorbidities, demographics of patient populations and deprivation scores. SETTING: Primary Care. PARTICIPANTS: 7283 NHS GP surgeries in England. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: The association between IM GPs and antibiotic prescribing rates per STAR-PU with the number of antibiotic prescriptions (total, and for respiratory tract infection (RTI) and urinary tract infection (UTI) separately) as outcome. RESULTS: IM GP surgeries (n=9) were comparable to conventional GP surgeries in terms of list sizes, demographics, deprivation scores and comorbidity prevalence. Negative binomial regression models showed that statistically significant fewer total antibiotics (relative risk (RR) 0.78, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.97) and RTI antibiotics (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.94) were prescribed at NHS IM GP surgeries compared with conventional NHS GP surgeries. In contrast, the number of antibiotics prescribed for UTI were similar between both practices. CONCLUSION: NHS England GP surgeries employing GPs additionally trained in IM/CAM have lower antibiotic prescribing rates. Accessibility of IM/CAM within NHS England primary care is limited. Main study limitation is the lack of consultation data. Future research should include the differences in consultation behaviour of patients self-selecting to consult an IM GP or conventional surgery, and its effect on antibiotic prescription. Additional treatment strategies for common primary care infections used by IM GPs should be explored to see if they could be used to assist in the fight against antimicrobial resistance.

The ALMANACH Project: Preliminary results and potentiality from Afghanistan.

INTRODUCTION: ALMANACH (ALgorithms for the MANagement of Acute CHildhood illnesses) is an electronic version of IMCI (Integrated Management of Childhood Illness) running on tablets. ALMANACH enhances its concept, it integrates well into health staff's daily consultation work and facilitates diagnosis and treatment. ALMANACH informs when to refer a child or to perform a rapid diagnostic test (RDT), recommends the right treatment dosage and synchronizes collected data real time with a Health Management Information System (DHIS2) for epidemiological evaluation and decision making. OBJECTIVES: Since May 2016, ALMANACH is under investigational deployment in three primary health care facilities in Afghanistan with the goal to improve the quality of care provided to children between 2 months and 5 years old. METHODS: IMCI's algorithms were updated in considering latest scientific publications, national guidelines, innovations in RDTs, the target population's epidemiological profile and the local resources available. Before the implementation of the project, a direct observation of 599 consultations was carried out to assess the daily performance at three selected health facilities in Kabul. RESULTS: The baseline survey showed that nutritional screening, vitamin A supplementation and deworming were not systematically performed: few patients were diagnosed for malnutrition (1.8%), received vitamin A (2.7%) or deworming (7.5%). Physical examination was appropriate only for 23.8% of the diagnoses of respiratory or gastrointestinal diseases, ear infection and sore throat. Respiratory rate was checked only in 33.5% of the children with fever and cough, dehydration status was assessed in only 16.5% of the diarrhoea cases. Forty-seven percent of patients received incorrect treatment. Sixty-four percent of the children, before the introduction of ALMANACH, received at least one antibiotic, although for 87.1% antibiotic therapy was unnecessary. The review of 8'047 paediatric consultations between May 2016 and September 2017 showed that with ALMANACH, malnutrition detection, deworming and Vitamin A supplementation increased respectively to 4.4%, 50.2% and 27.5%. Antibiotic prescription decreased to 21.83% and all children were examined and treated in compliance with the protocols. CONCLUSION: A survey will be conducted one year after the implementation to validate these initial promising results. If the efficacy of the approach is confirmed, ALMANACH could establish as a powerful innovation for primary health care.

Selective reporting of antibiotic susceptibility test results in European countries: an ESCMID cross-sectional survey.

Selective reporting of antibiotic susceptibility test (AST) results is one possible laboratory-based antibiotic stewardship intervention. The primary aim of this study was to identify where and how selective reporting of AST results is implemented in Europe both in inpatient and in outpatient settings. An ESCMID cross-sectional, self-administered, internet-based survey was conducted among all EUCIC (European Committee on Infection Control) or EUCAST (European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing) national representatives in Europe and Israel. Of 38 countries, 36 chose to participate in the survey. Selective reporting of AST results was implemented in 11/36 countries (31%), was partially implemented in 4/36 (11%) and was limited to local initiatives or was not adopted in 21/36 (58%). It was endorsed as standard of care by health authorities in only three countries. The organisation of selective reporting was everywhere discretionally managed by each laboratory, with a pronounced intra- and inter-country variability. The most frequent application was in uncomplicated community-acquired infections, particularly urinary tract and skin and soft-tissue infections. The list of reported antibiotics ranged from a few first-line options, to longer reports where only last-resort antibiotics were hidden. Several barriers to implementation were reported, mainly lack of guidelines, poor system support, insufficient resources, and lack of professionals' capability. In conclusion, selective reporting of AST results is poorly implemented in Europe and is applied with a huge heterogeneity of practices. Development of an international framework, based on existing initiatives and identified barriers, could favour its dissemination as one important element of antibiotic stewardship programmes.