The Impact of a National Antimicrobial Stewardship Program on Antibiotic Prescribing in Primary Care: An Interrupted Time Series Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The Quality Premium was introduced in 2015 to financially reward local commissioners of healthcare in England for targeted reductions in antibiotic prescribing in primary care. METHODS: We used a national antibiotic prescribing dataset from April 2013 until February 2017 to examine the number of antibiotic items prescribed, the total number of antibiotic items prescribed per STAR-PU (specific therapeutic group age/sex-related prescribing units), the number of broad-spectrum antibiotic items prescribed, and broad-spectrum antibiotic items prescribed, expressed as a percentage of the total number of antibiotic items. To evaluate the impact of the Quality Premium on antibiotic prescribing, we used a segmented regression analysis of interrupted time series data. RESULTS: During the study period, over 140 million antibiotic items were prescribed in primary care. Following the introduction of the Quality Premium, antibiotic items prescribed decreased by 8.2%, representing 5933563 fewer antibiotic items prescribed during the 23 post-intervention months, as compared with the expected numbers based on the trend in the pre-intervention period. After adjusting for the age and sex distribution in the population, the segmented regression model also showed a significant relative decrease in antibiotic items prescribed per STAR-PU. A similar effect was found for broad-spectrum antibiotics (comprising 10.1% of total antibiotic prescribing), with an 18.9% reduction in prescribing. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that the introduction of financial incentives for local commissioners of healthcare to improve the quality of prescribing was associated with a significant reduction in both total and broad-spectrum antibiotic prescribing in primary care in England.

An Assessment of Potential Unintended Consequences Following a National Antimicrobial Stewardship Program in England: An Interrupted Time Series Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The "Quality Premium" (QP) introduced in England in 2015 aimed to financially reward local healthcare commissioners for targeted reductions in primary care antibiotic prescribing. We aimed to evaluate possible unintended clinical outcomes related to this QP. METHODS: Using Clinical Practice Research Datalink and Hospital Episode Statistics datasets, we examined general practitioner (GP) consultations (visits) and emergency hospital admissions related to a series of predefined conditions of unintended consequences of reduced prescribing. Monthly age- and sex-standardized rates were calculated using a direct method of standardization. We used segmented regression analysis of interrupted time series to evaluate the impact of the QP on seasonally adjusted outcome rates. RESULTS: We identified 27334 GP consultations and >5 million emergency hospital admissions with predefined conditions. There was no evidence that the QP was associated with changes in GP consultation and hospital admission rates for the selected conditions combined. However, when each condition was considered separately, a significant increase in hospital admission rates was noted for quinsy, and significant decreases were seen for hospital-acquired pneumonia, scarlet fever, pyelonephritis, and complicated urinary tract conditions. A significant decrease in GP consultation rates was estimated for empyema and scarlet fever. No significant changes were observed for other conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this study show that overall there was no significant association between the intervention and unintended clinical consequences, with the exception of a few specific conditions, most of which could be explained through other parallel policy changes or should be interpreted with caution due to small numbers.

The Risk of Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes Following Nonobstetric Surgery During Pregnancy: Estimates From a Retrospective Cohort Study of 6.5 Million Pregnancies.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to estimate the risk of adverse birth outcomes for women who underwent nonobstetric surgery during pregnancy compared with those who did not. BACKGROUND: Previous research suggests that nonobstetric surgery occurs during 1% to 2% of pregnancies. However, there is limited evidence quantifying risks to the mother or pregnancy of such surgery. METHODS: We examined maternity admissions using hospital administrative data collected between April 1, 2002, and March 31, 2012, and identified pregnancies wherein nonobstetric surgery occurred. We used logistic regression models to determine the adjusted relative risk, attributable risk, and number needed to harm of nonobstetric surgical procedures for adverse birth outcomes. RESULTS: We identified 6,486,280 pregnancies. In 47,628 of these pregnancies, nonobstetric surgery had occurred. We found that nonobstetric surgery during pregnancy was associated with a higher risk of adverse birth outcomes, although the attributable risk was generally low. We estimated that every 287 surgical operations were associated with 1 additional stillbirth, every 31 operations associated with 1 additional preterm delivery, every 39 operations associated with 1 additional low birth weight baby, every 25 operations associated with 1 additional caesarean section, and every 50 operations associated with 1 additional long inpatient stay. CONCLUSIONS: Although we have no means of disentangling the effect of the surgery from the effect of the underlying condition, we found that the risk associated with nonobstetric surgery was relatively low, confirming that surgical procedures during pregnancy are generally safe. We believe that our findings improve upon previous research, and are useful reference points for any discussion of risk with prospective patients.

The use of, and outcomes for, inflammatory bowel disease services during the Covid-19 pandemic: a nationwide observational study.

BACKGROUND: Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) services have been particularly affected by the Covid-19 pandemic. Delays in referral to secondary care and access to investigations and surgery have been exacerbated. AIMS: To investigate the use of and outcomes for emergency IBD care during the Covid-19 pandemic. METHODS: Nationwide observational study using administrative data for England (2015-2020) comparing cohorts admitted from 1 January 2015, to 31 January 2020 (pre-pandemic) and from 1 February 2020, to 31 January 2021 (pandemic). Autoregressive integrated moving average forecast models were run to estimate the counterfactual IBD admissions and procedures for February 2020 to January 2021. RESULTS: Large decreases in attendances to hospital for emergency treatment were observed for both acute ulcerative colitis (UC, 16.4%) and acute Crohn's disease (CD, 8.7%). The prevalence of concomitant Covid-19 during the same episode was low [391/16 494 (2.4%) and 349/15 613 (2.2%), respectively]. No significant difference in 30-day mortality was observed. A shorter median length of stay by 1 day for acute IBD admissions was observed (P < 0.0001). A higher rate of emergency readmission within 28 days for acute UC was observed (14.1% vs 13.4%, P = 0.012). All IBD procedures and investigations showed decreases in volume from February 2020 to January 2021 compared with counterfactual estimates. The largest absolute deficit was in endoscopy (17 544 fewer procedures, 35.2% reduction). CONCLUSION: There is likely a significant burden of untreated IBD in the community. Patients with IBD may experience clinical harm or protracted decreases in quality of life if care is not prioritised.

Reorganisation of stroke care and impact on mortality in patients admitted during weekends: a national descriptive study based on administrative data.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate mortality differences between weekend and weekday emergency stroke admissions in England over time, and in particular, whether a reconfiguration of stroke services in Greater London was associated with a change in this mortality difference. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Risk-adjusted difference-in-difference time trend analysis using hospital administrative data. All emergency patients with stroke admitted to English hospitals from 1 January 2008 to 31 December 2014 were included. MAIN OUTCOMES: Mortality difference between weekend and weekday emergency stroke admissions. RESULTS: We identified 507 169 emergency stroke admissions: 26% of these occurred during the weekend. The 7-day in-hospital mortality difference between weekend and weekday admissions declined across England throughout the study period. In Greater London, where the reorganisation of stroke services took place, an adjusted 28% (relative risk (RR)=1.28, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.47) higher weekend/weekday 7-day mortality ratio in 2008 declined to a non-significant 9% higher risk (RR=1.09, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.32) in 2014. For the rest of England, a 15% (RR=1.15, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.22) higher weekend/weekday 7-day mortality ratio in 2008 declined to a non-significant 3% higher risk (RR=1.03, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.10) in 2014. During the same period, in Greater London an adjusted 12% (RR=1.12, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.26) weekend/weekday 30-day mortality ratio in 2008 slightly increased to 14% (RR=1.14, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.30); however, it was not significant. In the rest of England, an 11% (RR=1.11, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.15) higher weekend/weekday 30-day mortality ratio declined to a non-significant 4% higher risk (RR=1.04, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.09) in 2014. We found no statistically significant association between decreases in the weekend/weekday admissions difference in mortality and the centralisation of stroke services in Greater London. CONCLUSIONS: There was a steady reduction in weekend/weekday differences in mortality in stroke admissions across England. It appears statistically unrelated to the centralisation of stroke services in Greater London, and is consistent with an overall national focus on improving stroke services.