Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros

Bases de datos
País/Región como asunto
Tipo del documento
País de afiliación
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Open Forum Infect Dis ; 9(7): ofac302, 2022 Jul.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35891692

RESUMEN

Background: Most antibiotics are prescribed in the ambulatory setting with estimates that up to 50% of use is inappropriate. Understanding factors associated with antibiotic misuse is essential to advancing better stewardship in this setting. We sought to assess the frequency of unnecessary antibiotic use for upper respiratory infections (URIs) among primary care providers and identify patient and provider characteristics associated with misuse. Methods: Unnecessary antibiotic prescribing was assessed in a descriptive study by using adults ≥18 years seen for common URIs in a large, Upper Midwest, integrated health system, electronic medical records from June 2017 through May 2018. Individual provider rates of unnecessary prescribing were compared for primary care providers practicing in the departments of internal medicine, family medicine, or urgent care. Patient and provider characteristics associated with unnecessary prescribing were identified with a logistic regression model. Results: A total of 49 463 patient encounters were included. Overall, antibiotics were prescribed unnecessarily for 42.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 41.7-42.6) of the encounters. Patients with acute bronchitis received unnecessary antibiotics most frequently (74.2%; 95% CI, 73.4-75.0). Males and older patients were more likely to have an unnecessary antibiotic prescription. Provider characteristics associated with higher rates of unnecessary prescribing included being in a rural practice, having more years in practice, and being in higher volume practices such as an urgent care setting. Fifteen percent of providers accounted for half of all unnecessary antibiotic prescriptions. Conclusions: Although higher-volume practices, a rural setting, or longer time in practice were predictors, unnecessary prescribing was common among all providers.

2.
J Manag Care Spec Pharm ; 24(2): 154-159, 2018 Feb.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29384025

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Antimicrobial resistance is a growing concern, and in recent years, there has been increased interest in ambulatory antimicrobial stewardship. Acute rhinosinusitis (ARS) is one of the most common outpatient diagnoses that results in an antibiotic prescription. OBJECTIVE: To determine if a best practice alert (BPA) will affect the percentage of oral antibiotic prescriptions for adults with ARS. METHODS: A prospective, pre/post study was initiated to evaluate the percentage of oral antibiotic prescriptions for ARS in 117 primary care clinics in the Midwest. Included in the study results were 16,570 adults who had an office visit for ARS: 8,106 patients from December 1, 2015, to February 28, 2016, were in the pre-intervention group without an active BPA, and 8,464 patients from December 1, 2016, to February 28, 2017, were in the post-intervention group when the BPA was active. The primary outcome was the number of oral antibiotic prescriptions for ARS compared with the number of office visits for ARS in the pre- and postintervention groups. RESULTS: The percentage of oral antibiotics prescribed for the pre- and postintervention groups were 94.8% and 94.3%, respectively (P = 0.152). The BPA displayed for 7,780 visits, prompting discontinuation of an antibiotic for 10 (0.1%) visits in the postintervention group. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that, although an electronic alert may be attractive to facilitate antimicrobial stewardship, it may be ineffective. These results warrant alternative measures to facilitate ambulatory antimicrobial stewardship. DISCLOSURES: No outside funding supported this study. The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare. Study concept and design were contributed by Hansen, D. Leedahl, and N. Leedahl. Hansen and N. Leedahl took the lead in data collection, with assistance from Carson and D. Leedahl. Data interpretation was performed by all the authors. The manuscript was written by Hansen, along with the other authors, and revised by all the authors.


Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos/administración & dosificación , Programas de Optimización del Uso de los Antimicrobianos/tendencias , Benchmarking/tendencias , Sistemas de Entrada de Órdenes Médicas/tendencias , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/tendencias , Atención Primaria de Salud/tendencias , Rinitis/tratamiento farmacológico , Sinusitis/tratamiento farmacológico , Enfermedad Aguda , Administración Oral , Adulto , Programas de Optimización del Uso de los Antimicrobianos/normas , Benchmarking/normas , Estudios de Casos y Controles , Prescripciones de Medicamentos , Femenino , Adhesión a Directriz/tendencias , Humanos , Masculino , Sistemas de Entrada de Órdenes Médicas/normas , Persona de Mediana Edad , Medio Oeste de Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Visita a Consultorio Médico/tendencias , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/normas , Atención Primaria de Salud/normas , Estudios Prospectivos , Rinitis/diagnóstico , Rinitis/epidemiología , Rinitis/microbiología , Sinusitis/diagnóstico , Sinusitis/epidemiología , Sinusitis/microbiología , Factores de Tiempo , Procedimientos Innecesarios/tendencias
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA