Prevalence and appropriateness of in-person versus not-in-person ambulatory antibiotic prescribing in an integrated academic health system: A cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: Ambulatory antibiotic stewardship generally aims to address the appropriateness of antibiotics prescribed at in-person visits. The prevalence and appropriateness of antibiotics prescribed outside of in-person visits is poorly studied. DESIGN AND SETTING: Retrospective cohort study of all ambulatory antibiotic prescribing in an integrated health delivery system in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: Antibiotic prescribers and patients receiving oral antibiotic prescriptions between January 2016 and December 2019. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Proportion of antibiotics prescribed with in-person visits or not-in-person encounters (e.g., telephone, refills). Proportion of prescriptions in in 5 mutually exclusive appropriateness groups: 1) chronic antibiotic use; 2) antibiotic-appropriate; 3) potentially antibiotic-appropriate; 4) non-antibiotic-appropriate; and 5) not associated with a diagnosis. RESULTS: Over the 4-year study period, there were 714,057 antibiotic prescriptions ordered for 348,739 unique patients by 2,391 clinicians in 467 clinics. Patients had a mean age of 41 years old, were 61% female, and 78% White. Clinicians were 58% women; 78% physicians; and were 42% primary care, 39% medical specialists, and 12% surgical specialists. Overall, 81% of antibiotics were prescribed with in-person visits and 19% without in-person visits. The most common not-in-person encounter types were telephone (10%), orders only (5%), and refill encounters (3%). Of all antibiotic prescriptions, 16% were for chronic use, 15% were antibiotic-appropriate, 39% were potentially antibiotic-appropriate, 22% were non-antibiotic-appropriate, and 8% were not associated with a diagnosis. Antibiotics prescribed in not-in-person encounters were more likely to be chronic (20% versus 15%); less likely to be associated with appropriate or potentially appropriate diagnoses (30% versus 59%) or non-antibiotic-appropriate diagnoses (8% versus 25%); and more likely to be associated with no diagnosis (42% versus <1%). CONCLUSIONS: Ambulatory stewardship interventions that focus only on in-person visits may miss a large proportion of antibiotic prescribing, inappropriate prescribing, and antibiotics prescribed in the absence of any diagnosis.

Look-Back and Look-Forward Durations and the Apparent Appropriateness of Ambulatory Antibiotic Prescribing.

Ambulatory antibiotic stewards, researchers, and performance measurement programs choose different durations to associate diagnoses with antibiotic prescriptions. We assessed how the apparent appropriateness of antibiotic prescribing changes when using different look-back and look-forward periods. Examining durations of 0 days (same-day), -3 days, -7 days, -30 days, ±3 days, ±7 days, and ±30 days, we classified all ambulatory antibiotic prescriptions in the electronic health record of an integrated health care system from 2016 to 2019 (714,057 prescriptions to 348,739 patients by 2391 clinicians) as chronic, appropriate, potentially appropriate, inappropriate, or not associated with any diagnosis. Overall, 16% percent of all prescriptions were classified as chronic infection related. Using only same-day diagnoses, appropriate, potentially appropriate, inappropriate, and not-associated antibiotics, accounted for 14%, 36%, 22%, and 11% of prescriptions, respectively. As the duration of association increased, the proportion of appropriate antibiotics stayed the same (range, 14% to 18%), potentially appropriate antibiotics increased (e.g., 43% for -30 days), inappropriate stayed the same (range, 22% to 24%), and not-associated antibiotics decreased (e.g., 2% for -30 days). Using the longest look-back-and-forward duration (±30 days), appropriate, potentially appropriate, inappropriate, and not-associated antibiotics, accounted for 18%, 44%, 20%, and 2% of prescriptions, respectively. Ambulatory programs and studies focused on appropriate or inappropriate antibiotic prescribing can reasonably use a short duration of association between an antibiotic prescription and diagnosis codes. Programs and studies focused on potentially appropriate antibiotic prescribing might consider examining longer durations.

Incidence and Predictors of Primary Nonadherence to Sodium Glucose Co-transporter 2 Inhibitors and Glucagon-Like Peptide 1 Agonists in a Large Integrated Healthcare System.

BACKGROUND: Newer glucose-lowering drugs, including sodium glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) and GLP-1 agonists, have a key role in the pharmacologic management of type 2 diabetes. No studies have measured primary nonadherence for these two drug classes, defined as when a medication is prescribed for a patient but ultimately not dispensed to them. OBJECTIVE: To describe the incidence and predictors of primary nonadherence to SGLT2i (canagliflozin, empagliflozin) or GLP-1 agonists (dulaglutide, liraglutide, semaglutide) using a dataset that links electronic prescribing with health insurance claims. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: A retrospective cohort design using data of adult patients from a large health system who had at least one prescription order for a SGLT2i or GLP-1 agonist between 2012 and 2019. We used mixed-effects multivariable logistic regression to determine associations between sociodemographic, clinical, and provider variables and primary nonadherence. MAIN MEASURES: Primary medication nonadherence, defined as no dispensed claim within 30 days of an electronic prescription order for any drug within each medication class. KEY RESULTS: The cohort included 5146 patients newly prescribed a SGLT2i or GLP-1 agonist. The overall incidence of 30-day primary medication nonadherence was 31.8% (1637/5146). This incidence rate was 29.8% (n = 726) and 33.6% (n = 911) among those initiating a GLP-1 agonist and SGLT2i, respectively. Age ≥ 65 (aOR 1.37 (95% CI 1.09 to 1.72)), Black race vs White (aOR 1.29 (95% CI 1.02 to 1.62)), diabetic nephropathy (aOR 1.31 (95% CI 1.02 to 1.68)), and hyperlipidemia (aOR 1.18 (95% CI 1.01 to 1.39)) were associated with a higher odds of primary nonadherence. Female sex (aOR 0.86 (95% CI 0.75 to 0.99)), peripheral artery disease (aOR 0.73 (95% CI 0.56 to 0.94)), and having the index prescription ordered by an endocrinologist vs a primary care provider (aOR 0.76 (95% CI 0.61 to 0.95)) were associated with lower odds of primary nonadherence. CONCLUSIONS: One third of patients prescribed SGLT2i or GLP-1 agonists in this sample did not fill their prescription within 30 days. Black race, male sex, older age, having greater baseline comorbidities, and having a primary care provider vs endocrinologist prescribe the index drug were associated with higher odds of primary nonadherence. Interventions targeting medication adherence for these newer drugs must consider primary nonadherence as a barrier to optimal clinical care.

Nononcologic use of human recombinant erythropoietin therapy in hospitalized patients.

BACKGROUND: Human recombinant erythropoietin (rHuEPO) is widely used to stimulate red blood cell production in patients with anemia due to cancer, renal disease, and other medical conditions, but concern has grown about its overuse and potential for harm. Little is known about the nature of rHuEPO use in hospitalized patients who receive rHuEPO therapy for nononcologic indications. METHODS: We reviewed the drug utilization data from a large academic medical center for all patients admitted during 3 years to identify all patients without cancer who received at least 1 dose of rHuEPO, including their age and sex; diagnoses; hematocrit and hemoglobin and iron levels; and use of supplemental iron. We also compared the rates of laboratory testing and iron supplementation in patients with and without chronic kidney disease (CKD). RESULTS: A total of 1360 distinct patients with 3094 hospitalizations received at least 1 dose of rHuEPO. In 2959 admissions for which hematocrit was determined within 14 days before rHuEPO use, mean values were less than 33% in 1792 (61%) and greater than 36% in 553 (19%). Patients with CKD were more likely than patients without CKD to receive rHuEPO with hematocrit greater than 36% (22% vs 8%; P<.001). Monitoring of iron status was more common in patients with CKD than in those without CKD (64% vs 45%; P <.001). Almost one fourth (23%) of rHuEPO recipients in whom iron levels were measured had absolute iron deficiency (serum ferritin concentration <100 ng/mL). In patients with CKD, only about half (54%) had adequate iron stores at the time of rHuEPO administration; this rate was even lower in patients without CKD (33%; P<.001). Only 66% of patients with documented iron deficiency who were receiving rHuEPO also received concomitant iron supplementation; this rate did not differ between patients with or without CKD. CONCLUSIONS: There is significant variability in the degree of anemia, completeness of iron measurement, and use of iron supplementation in hospitalized patients without cancer who are prescribed rHuEPO. Our results identify potential targets for quality improvement in patients both with and without CKD.