Perception and views about individualising antibiotic duration for respiratory tract infections when patients feel better: a qualitative study with primary care professionals.

BACKGROUND: Evidence shows a high rate of unnecessary antibiotic prescriptions for respiratory tract infections (RTIs) in primary care. There is increasing evidence showing that shorter courses for RTIs are safe and help in reducing antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Stopping antibiotics earlier, as soon as patients feel better, rather than completing antibiotic courses, may help reduce unnecessary exposure to antibiotics and AMR. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to explore the perceptions and views of primary care healthcare professionals about customising antibiotic duration for RTIs by asking patients to stop the antibiotic course when they feel better. DESIGN: Qualitative research. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A total of 21 qualitative interviews with primary care professionals (experts and non-experts in AMR) were conducted from June to September 2023. Data were audiorecorded, transcribed and analysed thematically. RESULTS: Overall, experts seemed more amenable to tailoring the antibiotic duration for RTIs when patients feel better. They also found the dogma of 'completing the course' to be obsolete, as evidence is changing and reducing the duration might lead to less AMR, but claimed that evidence that this strategy is as beneficial and safe as fixed courses was unambiguous. Non-experts, however, believed the dogma of completing the course. Clinicians expressed mixed views on what feeling better might mean, supporting a shared decision-making approach when appropriate. Participants claimed good communication to professionals and patients, but were sceptical about the risk of medicalisation when asking patients to contact clinicians again for a check-up visit. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians reported positive and negative views about individualising antibiotic courses for RTIs, but, in general, experts supported a customised antibiotic duration as soon as patients feel better. The information provided by this qualitative study will allow improving the performance of a large randomised clinical trial aimed at evaluating if this strategy is safe and beneficial.

Implementation of the delayed antibiotic prescribing strategy. Prospective observation study in primary care / Implementación de la estrategia de prescripción diferida de antibióticos. Estudio observacional prospectivo en atención primaria

Objectives. We aimed to compare the actual consumption of antibiotics among patients issued delayed antibioticprescribing with the consumption observed in a non-systematic review of studies on delayed prescribing.Methods. Observational study carried out in three primary care centres from September 2018 until March 2020. Wetracked the electronic records of the 82 patients with episodesof acute bronchitis and 44 acute pharyngitis who were givena patient-led delayed prescription to determine whether theprescription was filled and when this medication was obtained.Results. The prescriptions were never filled in 50 cases(39.7%), but five patients took another antibiotic within thefirst two weeks. Out of 76 patients who did take the delayedprescription, only 12 obtained the medication based on the instructions given by the doctors (15.8%).Conclusions. The strategy of delayed antibiotic prescribing resulted in a reduction in antibiotic use, but this reductionwas lower than in randomised clinical trials, being comparable to the results obtained with other observational studies ondelayed antibiotic prescribing. In addition, only a few patientsadhered to the doctors’ instructions (AU)

Objetivos. Evaluar el consumo de antibióticos entre lospacientes a los que se les efectuó una prescripción antibióticadiferida y compararlo con el consumo observado en una revisión no sistemática de estudios de prescripción diferida.Métodos. Estudio observacional en tres centros de saluddesde septiembre 2018 hasta marzo 2020. Se realizó un seguimiento de los registros electrónicos de los 82 pacientes conepisodios de bronquitis aguda y 44 faringitis aguda a los quese les entregó una prescripción diferida para evaluar si fue a lafarmacia a buscarla y cuándo la obtuvo.Resultados. No fueron a buscar la medicación en 50 casos (39,7%), pero cinco pacientes tomaron otro antibiótico enlas dos primeras semanas. De los 76 pacientes que recogieronla prescripción, solo 12 la obtuvieron según las instruccionesde sus médicos (15,8%).Conclusiones. La estrategia de prescripción diferida reduce el consumo de antibióticos, pero esta reducción es menorque la que se observa en ensayos clínicos, siendo comparablecon los resultados observados en otros estudios observacionales sobre prescripción diferida. Además, solo unos pocos pacientes siguieron las instrucciones de sus médicos. (AU)

Efficacy and safety of discontinuing antibiotic treatment for uncomplicated respiratory tract infections when deemed unnecessary. A multicentre, randomized clinical trial in primary care.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the benefits and harms of discontinuing unnecessary antibiotic therapy for uncomplicated respiratory tract infections (RTI) when antibiotics are considered no longer necessary. METHODS: Multicentre, open-label, randomized controlled clinical trial in primary care centres from 2017 to 2020 (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02900820). Adults with RTIs-acute rhinosinusitis, sore throat, influenza or acute bronchitis-who had previously taken any dose of antibiotic for less than 3 days, which physicians no longer deemed necessary were recruited. The patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to discontinuing antibiotic therapy or the usual strategy of continuing antibiotic treatment. The primary outcome was the duration of severe symptoms (number of days scoring 5 or 6 on a six-item Likert scale). Secondary outcomes included days with symptoms, moderate symptoms (scores of 3 or 4), antibiotics taken, adverse events, patient satisfaction and complications within the first 3 months. RESULTS: A total of 467 patients were randomized, out of which 409 were considered valid for the analysis. The mean (SD) duration of severe symptoms was 3.0 (1.5) days for the patients assigned to discontinuation and 2.8 (1.3) days for those allocated to the control group (mean difference 0.2 days; 95% CI -0.1 to 0.4 days). Patients randomized to the discontinuation group used fewer antibiotics after the baseline visit (52/207 (25.1%) versus 182/202 (90.1%); p 0.001). Patients assigned to antibiotic continuation presented a relative risk of adverse events of 1.47 (95% CI 0.80-2.71), but the need for further health-care contact in the following 3 months was slightly lower (RR 0.61; 95% CI 0.28-1.37). CONCLUSIONS: Discontinuing antibiotic treatment for uncomplicated RTIs when clinicians consider it unnecessary is safe and notably reduces antibiotic consumption.

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of Improving clinicians' diagnostic and communication Skills on Antibiotic prescribing Appropriateness in patients with acute Cough in primary care in CATalonia (the ISAAC-CAT study): study protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite their marginal benefit, about 60% of acute lower respiratory tract infections (ALRTIs) are currently treated with antibiotics in Catalonia. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of a continuous disease-focused intervention (C-reactive protein [CRP]) and an illness-focused intervention (enhancement of communication skills to optimise doctor-patient consultations) on antibiotic prescribing in patients with ALRTIs in Catalan primary care centres. METHODS/DESIGN: A cluster randomised, factorial, controlled trial aimed at including 20 primary care centres (N = 2940 patients) with patients older than 18 years of age presenting for a first consultation with an ALRTI will be included in the study. Primary care centres will be identified on the basis of socioeconomic data and antibiotic consumption. Centres will be randomly assigned according to hierarchical clustering to any of four trial arms: usual care, CRP testing, enhanced communication skills backed up with patient leaflets, or combined interventions. A cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analysis will be performed from the societal and national healthcare system perspectives, and the time horizon of the analysis will be 1 year. Two qualitative studies (pre- and post-clinical trial) aimed to identify the expectations and concerns of patients with ALRTIs and the barriers and facilitators of each intervention arm will be run. Family doctors and nurses assigned to the interventions will participate in a 2-h training workshop before the inception of the trial and will receive a monthly intervention-tailored training module during the year of the trial period. Primary outcomes will be antibiotic use within the first 6 weeks, duration of moderate to severe cough, and the quality-adjusted life-years. Secondary outcomes will be duration of illness and severity of cough measured using a symptom diary, healthcare re-consultations, hospital admissions, and complications. Healthcare costs will be considered and expressed in 2021 euros (year foreseen to finalise the study) of the current year of the analysis. Univariate and multivariate sensitivity analyses will be carried out. DISCUSSION: The ISAAC-CAT project will contribute to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of different strategies for more appropriate antibiotic prescribing that are currently out of the scope of the actual clinical guidelines. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03931577.

Effectiveness of antitussives, anticholinergics or honey versus usual care in adults with uncomplicated acute bronchitis: a study protocol of an open randomised clinical trial in primary care.

INTRODUCTION: Despite the frequent use of therapies in acute bronchitis, the evidence of their benefit is lacking, since only a few clinical trials have been published, with low sample sizes, poor methodological quality and mainly in children. The objective of this study is to compare the effectiveness of three symptomatic therapies (dextromethorphan, ipratropium or honey) associated with usual care and the usual care in adults with acute bronchitis. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This will be a multicentre, pragmatic, parallel group, open randomised trial. Patients aged 18 or over with uncomplicated acute bronchitis, with cough for less than 3 weeks as the main symptom, scoring ≥4 in either daytime or nocturnal cough on a 7-point Likert scale, will be randomised to one of the following four groups: usual care, dextromethorphan 30 mg three times a day, ipratropium bromide inhaler 20 µg two puffs three times a day or honey 30 mg (a spoonful) three times a day, all taken for up to 14 days. The exclusion criteria will be pneumonia, criteria for hospital admission, pregnancy or lactation, concomitant pulmonary disease, associated significant comorbidity, allergy, intolerance or contraindication to any of the study drugs or admitted to a long-term residence. SAMPLE: 668 patients. The primary outcome will be the number of days with moderate-to-severe cough. All patients will be given a paper-based symptom diary to be self-administered. A second visit will be scheduled at day 2 or 3 for assessing evolution, with two more visits at days 15 and 29 for clinical assessment, evaluation of adverse effects, re-attendance and complications. Patients still with symptoms at day 29 will be called 6 weeks after the baseline visit. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has been approved by the Ethical Board of IDIAP Jordi Gol (reference number: AC18/002). The findings of this trial will be disseminated through research conferences and peer-review journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03738917; Pre-results.

Reducing antibiotic prescribing for lower respiratory tract infections 6 years after a multifaceted intervention.

AIMS: Few studies have evaluated the long-term impact of interventions on antibiotic prescription for lower respiratory tract infections (LRTI). This study was aimed at evaluating the use of antibiotics prescribed for LRTIs by general practitioners (GP) who underwent a multifaceted intervention carried out 6 years earlier. METHODS: General practitioners who had completed two registrations in 2008 and 2009 were again invited to participate in a third audit-based study in 2015. A multifaceted intervention was held 1-3 months before the second registration. A new group of GPs with no previous training on the rational use of antibiotics were also invited to participate and acted as controls. Multilevel logistic regression was performed considering the prescription of antibiotics as the dependent variable. RESULTS: A total of 121 GPs of the 210 who underwent the intervention (57.6%) and 117 control GPs registered 4333 episodes of LRTIs. On adjustment for covariables, compared with the antibiotic prescription for LRTIs observed just after the intervention, antibiotic prescription slightly increased 6 years later among GPs who had undergone the intervention (OR 1.17, 95% CI 0.95-1.43), while control GPs prescribed significantly more antibiotics (OR 2.31, 95% CI 1.62-3.29). However, withholding antibiotic prescribing with C-reactive protein (CRP) values <10 mg/L was more frequently observed just after the intervention compared 6 years later (12.7% vs 32.2%; P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Antibiotic prescribing for LRTIs remains low 6 years after an intervention, although GPs are less confident to withhold antibiotic therapy in patients with low CRP levels.

Efficacy of high doses of penicillin versus amoxicillin in the treatment of uncomplicated community acquired pneumonia in adults. A non-inferiority controlled clinical trial / Eficacia de dosis altas de penicilina frente a amoxicilina en el tratamiento de la neumonía no complicada adquirida en la comunidad en adultos. Ensayo clínico controlado de no inferioridad

Introduction: Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is treated with penicillin in some northern European countries. Objectives: To evaluate whether high-dose penicillin V is as effective as high-dose amoxicillin for the treatment of non-severe CAP. Design: Multicentre, parallel, double-blind, controlled, randomized clinical trial. Setting: 31 primary care centers in Spain. Participants: Patients from 18 to 75 years of age with no significant associated comorbidity and with symptoms of lower respiratory tract infection and radiological confirmation of CAP were randomized to receive either penicillin V 1.6 million units, or amoxicillin 1000mg three times per day for 10 days. Main measurements: The main outcome was clinical cure at 14 days, and the primary hypothesis was that penicillin V would be non-inferior to amoxicillin with regard to this outcome, with a margin of 15% for the difference in proportions. EudraCT register 2012-003511-63. Results: A total of 43 subjects (amoxicillin: 28; penicillin: 15) were randomized. Clinical cure was observed in 10 (90.9%) patients assigned to penicillin and in 25 (100%) patients assigned to amoxicillin with a difference of -9.1% (95% CI, --41.3% to 6.4%; p = .951) for non-inferiority. In the intention-to-treat analysis, amoxicillin was found to be 28.6% superior to penicillin (95% CI, 7.3-58.1%; p = .009 for superiority). The number of adverse events was similar in both groups. Conclusions: There was a trend favoring high-dose amoxicillin versus high-dose penicillin in adults with uncomplicated CAP. The main limitation of this trial was the low statistical power due to the low number of patients included

Introducción: En algunos países la neumonía adquirida en la comunidad (NAC) se trata con penicilina. Objetivo: Evaluar si penicilina V a dosis altas es igual de efectiva que amoxicilina a dosis altas en la NAC no complicada. Diseño. Ensayo clínico paralelo, doble ciego, controlado y multicéntrico. Emplazamiento: Treinta y un centros de salud en España. Participantes: Se reclutaron pacientes de 18 a 75 años de edad sin comorbilidad asociada importante, con síntomas de infección respiratoria inferior y confirmación radiológica de neumonía, que fueron asignados aleatoriamente a 1,6M unidades de penicilina V o amoxicilina 1.000 mg, 3 veces al día, durante 10 días. Mediciones principales: La variable de resultado principal fue curación clínica a los 14 días y se planteó la hipótesis de que penicilina no era inferior a amoxicilina con un margen de 15% para la diferencia de proporciones. Registro EudraCT 2012-003511-63. Resultados: Se aleatorizaron 43 personas (amoxicilina: 28; penicilina: 15). Se observó curación clínica en 10 pacientes asignados a penicilina (90,9%) y en 25 asignados a amoxicilina (100%), observándose una diferencia de -9,1% (IC 95%: -41,3 a 6,4%; p = 0,951) para no inferioridad. En el análisis por intención de tratar amoxicilina fue 28,6% superior a penicilina V (IC 95%: 7,3% a 58,1%; p = 0,009 para superioridad). El número de eventos adversos fue similar en ambos grupos. Conclusiones: Se observó una tendencia de un mayor beneficio de amoxicilina frente a penicilina en adultos con NAC no complicada. La principal limitación fue la baja potencia estadística debido al bajo número de pacientes incluidos

Efficacy of high doses of penicillin versus amoxicillin in the treatment of uncomplicated community acquired pneumonia in adults. A non-inferiority controlled clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is treated with penicillin in some northern European countries. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate whether high-dose penicillin V is as effective as high-dose amoxicillin for the treatment of non-severe CAP. DESIGN: Multicentre, parallel, double-blind, controlled, randomized clinical trial. SETTING: 31 primary care centers in Spain. PARTICIPANTS: Patients from 18 to 75 years of age with no significant associated comorbidity and with symptoms of lower respiratory tract infection and radiological confirmation of CAP were randomized to receive either penicillin V 1.6 million units, or amoxicillin 1000mg three times per day for 10 days. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: The main outcome was clinical cure at 14 days, and the primary hypothesis was that penicillin V would be non-inferior to amoxicillin with regard to this outcome, with a margin of 15% for the difference in proportions. EudraCT register 2012-003511-63. RESULTS: A total of 43 subjects (amoxicillin: 28; penicillin: 15) were randomized. Clinical cure was observed in 10 (90.9%) patients assigned to penicillin and in 25 (100%) patients assigned to amoxicillin with a difference of -9.1% (95% CI, -41.3% to 6.4%; p=.951) for non-inferiority. In the intention-to-treat analysis, amoxicillin was found to be 28.6% superior to penicillin (95% CI, 7.3-58.1%; p=.009 for superiority). The number of adverse events was similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: There was a trend favoring high-dose amoxicillin versus high-dose penicillin in adults with uncomplicated CAP. The main limitation of this trial was the low statistical power due to the low number of patients included.

Long-term effect of a practice-based intervention (HAPPY AUDIT) aimed at reducing antibiotic prescribing in patients with respiratory tract infections.

Objectives: Few studies have evaluated the long-term effects of educational interventions on antibiotic prescription and the results are controversial. This study was aimed at assessing the effect of a multifaceted practice-based intervention carried out 6 years earlier on current antibiotic prescription for respiratory tract infections (RTIs). Methods: The 210 general practitioners (GPs) who completed the first two registrations in 2008 and 2009 were invited to participate in a third registration. The intervention held before the second registration consisted of discussion about the first registration of results, appropriate use of antibiotics for RTIs, patient brochures, a workshop and the provision of rapid tests. As in the previous registrations, GPs were instructed to complete a template for all the patients with RTIs during 15 working days in 2015. A new group of GPs from the same areas was also invited to participate and acted as controls. A multilevel logistic regression analysis was performed considering the prescription of antibiotics as the dependent variable. Results: A total of 121 GPs included in the 2009 intervention (57.6%) and 117 control GPs registered 22 247 RTIs. On adjustment for covariables, compared with the antibiotic prescription observed just after the intervention, GPs assigned to intervention prescribed slightly more antibiotics 6 years later albeit without statistically significant differences (OR 1.08, 95% CI 0.89-1.31, P = 0.46), while GPs in the control group prescribed significantly more antibiotics (OR 2.74, 95% CI 2.09-3.59, P < 0.001). Conclusions: This study shows that a single multifaceted intervention continues to reduce antibiotic prescribing 6 years later.

Misconceptions of Spanish general practitioners' attitudes toward the management of urinary tract infections and asymptomatic bacteriuria: an internet-based questionnaire study / Ideas equivocadas de los médicos de atención primaria españoles en cuanto al manejo de las infecciones urinarias y bacteriuria asintomática: un estudio basado en un cuestionario online

Introduction. The diagnosis and management of urinary tract infections (UTI) vary widely across countries and practices. The objective of this study was to gain insight into general practitioners' (GP) perceptions on the current management of UTIs and asymptomatic bacteriuria in Spain. Methods. Cross-sectional, internet-based questionnaire study answered from July to September 2013. GPs affiliated with the largest Spanish scientific society in primary care (Sociedad Española de Medicina Familiar y Comunitaria) were invited to participate in the study. They were asked about the tests ordered in both uncomplicated and complicated UTIs and about the management in three clinical scenarios, depicting a 50-year woman with: 1. An uncomplicated UTI, 2. A complicated UTI, and 3. An asymptomatic bacteriuria. Results. The questionnaire was completed by 1,239 GPs (6.7%). Urine cultures were reportedly requested by 26.3% of the GPs in uncomplicated UTIs and by 71.8% of the cases corresponding to the complicated UTIs whereas it was declared that dipsticks were the preferred tests in only uncomplicated UTIs (38.2%). A total of 22% and 13.2% of the GPs stated that they would withhold antibiotic therapy in patients with lowcount and high-count asymptomatic bacteriuria, respectively. Conclusions. GPs have important misconceptions as to the indications for ordering urine cultures and in interpreting the definitions of common UTIs and treating UTIs and asymptomatic bacteriuria. The unnecessary use of antibiotics in patients with asymptomatic bacteriuria is considerable in Spain (AU)

Introducción. Tanto el diagnóstico como el manejo de las infecciones del tracto urinario (ITU) varían entre países y consultas. El objetivo de estudio fue conocer las percepciones de les médicos de atención primaria en cuanto al manejo de las ITU y bacteriuria asintomática en España. Métodos. Estudio transversal, basado en un cuestionario realizado online entre julio y septiembre de 2013. Se invitó a participar a los médicos de la sociedad científica más importante de atención primaria de España (Sociedad Española de Medicina Familiar y Comunitaria), a quienes se preguntó por las pruebas que solicitan en las ITU no complicada y complicada, así como el manejo en tres escenarios clínicos, que se basaban en una mujer de 50 años con 1. Una ITU no complicada, 2. Una ITU complicada y 3. Una bacteriuria asintomática. Resultados. Contestaron el cuestionario 1.239 médicos (6,7%). Los médicos declararon pedir urocultivos en un 26,3% de las ITU no complicadas y en un 71,8% de los casos de ITU complicadas mientras que admitieron usar preferentemente tiras reactivas de orina en la ITU no complicada (38,2%). Un 22% y un 13,2% de los médicos admitieron no prescribir antibióticos en casos de bacteriuria asintomática de bajo recuento y de alto recuento, respectivamente. Conclusiones. Los médicos de atención primaria tienen ideas equivocadas en cuanto a indicaciones de solicitar urocultivos, interpretar las distintas definiciones de las ITU más frecuentes y de tratar ITU y la bacteriuria asintomática. La utilización innecesaria de antibióticos en pacientes con bacteriuria asintomática es considerable en España (AU)

Estimated saving of antibiotics in pharyngitis and lower respiratory tract infections if general practitioners used rapid tests and followed guidelines / Ahorro estimado de antibióticos prescritos en faringitis e infecciones del tracto respiratorio inferior si los médicos de atención primaria usaran pruebas rápidas y siguieran las guías de práctica clínica

INTRODUCTION: General practitioners (GP) in Spain do not have access to rapid tests and adherence to guidelines is usually suboptimal. The aim of the study is to evaluate the estimated number of antibiotics that could have been saved if GPs had appropriately used these tests and had followed the guidelines. DESIGN: Observational study. SETTING: Primary care centres from eight Autonomous Communities in Spain. PARTICIPANTS: GPs who had not participated in previous studies on rational use of antibiotics. Intervention: GPs registered all the cases of pharyngitis and lower respiratory tract infections (LRTI) during 15 working days in 2015, by means of a 47-item audit. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: Actual GPs' antibiotic prescription and estimated number of antibiotics that could have been saved according to recent guidelines. RESULTS: A total of 126 GPs registered 1012 episodes of pharyngitis and 1928 LRTIs. Antibiotics were given or patients were referred in 497 patients with pharyngitis (49.1%) and 963 patients with LRTI (49.9%). If GPs had appropriately used rapid antigen detection tests and C-reactive protein tests and had strictly followed current guidelines, antibiotics would have been given to 7.6% and 15.1%, respectively, with an estimated saving of 420 antibiotics in patients with sore throat (estimated saving of 84.5%; 95% CI: 81.1-87.4%) and 672 antibiotics in LRTIs (estimated saving of 69.8%,95% CI: 67.1-72.5%). CONCLUSIONS: GP adherence to guidelines and a correct introduction of rapid tests in clinical practice in Spain could result in a considerable saving of unnecessary prescription of antibiotics in pharyngitis and LRTIs

INTRODUCCIÓN: Los médicos de familia (MF) en España no tienen acceso a pruebas rápidas y la adherencia a las guías clínicas es subóptima. El objetivo del estudio es evaluar el número estimado de antibióticos que podrían ahorrarse si los MF hubiesen usado las pruebas correctamente y hubieran seguido las guías. DISEÑO: Estudio observacional. Emplazamiento: Centros de atención primaria en 8 Comunidades Autónomas. PARTICIPANTES: MF que no habían participado en estudios anteriores sobre uso racional de antibióticos. Intervención: Los MF registraron los casos de faringitis e infecciones del tracto respiratorio inferior (ITRI) durante 15 días en 2015, mediante un audit de 47 ítems. Mediciones principales: Prescripción real de antibióticos realizada por los MF y antibióticos que se hubiesen ahorrado en base a las guías clínicas. RESULTADOS: 126 MF registraron 1.012 faringitis agudas y 1.928 ITRI. Se prescribieron antibióticos o fueron derivados 497 pacientes con faringitis (49,1%) y 963 con ITRI (49,9%). Si los MF hubiesen usado pruebas rápidas de detección antigénica y proteína C reactiva y hubieran seguido las directrices, se hubieran dado antibióticos al 7,6% y al 15.1%, respectivamente, con un ahorro estimado de 420 antibióticos en pacientes con faringitis (84,5%; IC 95%: 81,1-87,4%) y 672 antibióticos en pacientes con ITRI (69.8%, IC 95%: 67.1-72.5%).: CONCLUSIONES: La adherencia de los MF a las guías clínicas y una correcta introducción de las pruebas rápidas en la práctica clínica en España podrían reducir de forma considerable la prescripción innecesaria de antibióticos en la faringitis aguda y en las ITRI

The STOP-AB trial protocol: efficacy and safety of discontinuing patient antibiotic treatment when physicians no longer consider it necessary.

INTRODUCTION: Since 2011, the Spanish Society of Family Medicine has recommended general practitioners (GPs) to ask their patients to stop taking antibiotics when they suspect a viral infection. However, this practice is seldom used because uncertainty about diagnosis, and fear of consequences of discontinuing antibiotic therapy, as well as perceived pressure to continue prescribing antibiotics and potential conflict with patients are more of a concern for GPs than antibiotic resistance. The main objective of this study is to determine whether discontinuation of antibiotic therapy when a GP no longer considers it necessary has any impact on the number of days with severe symptoms. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled clinical trial. The study was conducted in 10 primary care centres in Spain. We included patients from 18 to 75 years of age with uncomplicated acute respiratory tract infections-acute rhinosinusitis, acute sore throat, influenza or acute bronchitis-who had previously taken any dose of antibiotic for <3 days, which physicians no longer considered necessary. The patients were randomly assigned to the usual strategy of continuing antibiotic treatment or to discontinuing antibiotic therapy. A sample size of 240 patients per group was calculated on the basis of a reduction of 1 day in the duration of severe symptoms being a clinically relevant outcome. The primary outcome was the duration of severe symptoms, that is, symptoms scored 5 or 6 by means of validated symptom diaries. Secondary outcomes included antibiotics taken, adverse events, patient satisfaction and complications within the first 3 months. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was approved by the Ethical Board of Fundació Jordi Gol i Gurina (reference number: 16/093). The findings of this trial will bedisseminated through research conferences and peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02900820; pre-results.

Survey of Spanish general practitioners' attitudes toward management of sore throat: an internet-based questionnaire study.

BACKGROUND: The management of sore throat varies widely in Europe. The objective of this study was to gain insight into clinicians' perceptions on the current management of sore throat in Spain. METHODS: Cross-sectional, internet-based questionnaire study answered from July to September 2013. General practitioners (GPs) affiliated with the two largest scientific societies of primary care were invited to participate in the study. Questions were asked about physician knowledge, the use of current national guidelines for sore throat management, and management in two clinical scenarios, depicting a young adult with sore throat and: 1. cough, coriza with or without fever, and 2. fever without cough and coriza. RESULTS: The questionnaire was completed by 1476 GPs (5%) and 12.7% declared using rapid antigen detection tests. Antibiotics were considered by 18.8% of the GPs in the first scenario and by 32% in the second scenario (p < 0.001). The antibiotics most commonly mentioned by GPs were amoxicillin and amoxicillin + clavulanate (52.7 and 31.2%, respectively) whereas penicillin V was only prescribed in 11.9% of the cases. The drugs most commonly considered in both scenarios were analgesics and anti-inflammatory drugs. Antitussives, decongestants and expectorants were more commonly prescribed in cases of suspected viral infection (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: GPs have misconceptions as to the indications for using rapid antigen detection tests and prescribing drugs in the management of sore throat. These results suggest that guidelines are seldom followed since one in five GPs declared giving antibiotics for patients with a suspected viral infection and the use of second-choice antibiotics seems considerable.

Estimated saving of antibiotics in pharyngitis and lower respiratory tract infections if general practitioners used rapid tests and followed guidelines.

INTRODUCTION: General practitioners (GP) in Spain do not have access to rapid tests and adherence to guidelines is usually suboptimal. The aim of the study is to evaluate the estimated number of antibiotics that could have been saved if GPs had appropriately used these tests and had followed the guidelines. DESIGN: Observational study. SETTING: Primary care centres from eight Autonomous Communities in Spain. PARTICIPANTS: GPs who had not participated in previous studies on rational use of antibiotics. INTERVENTION: GPs registered all the cases of pharyngitis and lower respiratory tract infections (LRTI) during 15 working days in 2015, by means of a 47-item audit. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: Actual GPs' antibiotic prescription and estimated number of antibiotics that could have been saved according to recent guidelines. RESULTS: A total of 126 GPs registered 1012 episodes of pharyngitis and 1928 LRTIs. Antibiotics were given or patients were referred in 497 patients with pharyngitis (49.1%) and 963 patients with LRTI (49.9%). If GPs had appropriately used rapid antigen detection tests and C-reactive protein tests and had strictly followed current guidelines, antibiotics would have been given to 7.6% and 15.1%, respectively, with an estimated saving of 420 antibiotics in patients with sore throat (estimated saving of 84.5%; 95% CI: 81.1-87.4%) and 672 antibiotics in LRTIs (estimated saving of 69.8%,95% CI: 67.1-72.5%). CONCLUSIONS: GP adherence to guidelines and a correct introduction of rapid tests in clinical practice in Spain could result in a considerable saving of unnecessary prescription of antibiotics in pharyngitis and LRTIs.

Recomendaciones para el manejo de la faringoamigdalitis aguda del adulto / Recommendations for management of acute pharyngitis in adults

La faringoamigdalitis aguda (FAA) en el adulto es una de las enfermedades infecciosas más comunes en la consulta del médico de familia. La etiología más frecuente es viral. Dentro de la etiología bacteriana, el principal agente responsable es Streptococcus pyogenes o estreptococo β-hemolítico del grupo A (EBHGA), causante del 5-30% de los casos. En el manejo diagnóstico, las escalas de valoración clínica para predecir la posible etiología bacteriana, son una buena ayuda para seleccionar a qué pacientes se deben practicar las técnicas de detección rápida de antígeno estreptocócico. Es conocido que, en general, sin estas técnicas se tiende al sobrediagnóstico de FAA estreptocócica, con la consiguiente prescripción innecesaria de antibióticos, muchas veces de amplio espectro. Así, con el manejo de las escalas y la técnica de diagnóstico rápido, elaboramos los algoritmos de manejo de la FAA. Los objetivos del tratamiento son acelerar la resolución de los síntomas, reducir el tiempo de contagio y prevenir las complicaciones supurativas locales y no supurativas. Los antibióticos de elección para el tratamiento de la FAA estreptocócica son penicilina y amoxicilina. La asociación de amoxicilina y clavulánico no está indicada en el tratamiento inicial en la infección aguda. Los macrólidos tampoco son un tratamiento de primera elección; su uso debe reservarse para pacientes con alergia a la penicilina. Es importante en nuestro país adecuar tanto el diagnóstico de la FAA bacteriana y la prescripción de antibióticos a la evidencia científica disponible. La implantación de protocolos de actuación en las farmacias comunitarias puede ser de utilidad para identificar y cribar los casos que no requieran tratamiento antibiótico

Acute pharyngitis in adults is one of the most common infectious diseases seen in general practitioners’ consultations. Viral aetiology is the most common. Among bacterial causes, the main agent is Streptococcus pyogenes or group A β-haemolytic streptococcus (GABHS), which causes 5%-30% of the episodes. In the diagnostic process, clinical assessment scales can help clinicians to better predict suspected bacterial aetiology by selecting patients who should undergo a rapid antigen detection test. If these techniques are not performed, an overdiagnosis of streptococcal pharyngitis often occurs, resulting in unnecessary prescriptions of antibiotics, most of which are broad spectrum. Consequently, management algorithms that include the use of predictive clinical rules and rapid tests have been set up. The aim of the treatment is speeding up symptom resolution, reducing the contagious time span and preventing local suppurative and non-suppurative complications. Penicillin and amoxicillin are the antibiotics of choice for the treatment of pharyngitis. The association of amoxicillin and clavulanate is not indicated as the initial treatment of acute infection. Neither are macrolides indicated as first-line therapy; they should be reserved for patients allergic to penicillin. The appropriate diagnosis of bacterial pharyngitis and proper use of antibiotics based on the scientific evidence available are crucial. Using management algorithms can be helpful in identifying and screening the cases that do not require antibiotic therapy

[Recommendations for management of acute pharyngitis in adults]. / Recomendaciones para el manejo de la faringoamigdalitis aguda del adulto.

Acute pharyngitis in adults is one of the most common infectious diseases seen in general practitioners' consultations. Viral aetiology is the most common. Among bacterial causes, the main agent is Streptococcus pyogenes or group A ß-haemolytic streptococcus (GABHS), which causes 5%-30% of the episodes. In the diagnostic process, clinical assessment scales can help clinicians to better predict suspected bacterial aetiology by selecting patients who should undergo a rapid antigen detection test. If these techniques are not performed, an overdiagnosis of streptococcal pharyngitis often occurs, resulting in unnecessary prescriptions of antibiotics, most of which are broad spectrum. Consequently, management algorithms that include the use of predictive clinical rules and rapid tests have been set up. The aim of the treatment is speeding up symptom resolution, reducing the contagious time span and preventing local suppurative and non-suppurative complications. Penicillin and amoxicillin are the antibiotics of choice for the treatment of pharyngitis. The association of amoxicillin and clavulanate is not indicated as the initial treatment of acute infection. Neither are macrolides indicated as first-line therapy; they should be reserved for patients allergic to penicillin. The appropriate diagnosis of bacterial pharyngitis and proper use of antibiotics based on the scientific evidence available are crucial. Using management algorithms can be helpful in identifying and screening the cases that do not require antibiotic therapy.

Recomendaciones para el manejo de la faringoamigdalitis aguda del adulto / Recommendations for management of acute pharyngitis in adults

La faringoamigdalitis aguda (FAA) en el adulto es una de las enfermedades infecciosas más comunes en la consulta del médico de familia. La etiología más frecuente es viral. Dentro de la etiología bacteriana, el principal agente responsable es Streptococcus pyogenes o estreptococo β-hemolítico del grupo A (EBHGA), causante del 5-30% de los casos. En el manejo diagnóstico, las escalas de valoración clínica para predecir la posible etiología bacteriana, son una buena ayuda para seleccionar a qué pacientes se deben practicar las técnicas de detección rápida de antígeno estreptocócico. Es conocido que, en general, sin estas técnicas se tiende al sobrediagnóstico de FAA estreptocócica, con la consiguiente prescripción innecesaria de antibióticos, muchas veces de amplio espectro. Así, con el manejo de las escalas y la técnica de diagnóstico rápido, elaboramos los algoritmos de manejo de la FAA. Los objetivos del tratamiento son acelerar la resolución de los síntomas, reducir el tiempo de contagio y prevenir las complicaciones supurativas locales y no supurativas. Los antibióticos de elección para el tratamiento de la FAA estreptocócica son penicilina y amoxicilina. La asociación de amoxicilina y clavulánico no está indicada en el tratamiento inicial en la infección aguda. Los macrólidos tampoco son un tratamiento de primera elección; su uso debe reservarse para pacientes con alergia a la penicilina. Es importante en nuestro país adecuar tanto el diagnóstico de la FAA bacteriana y la prescripción de antibióticos a la evidencia científica disponible. La implantación de protocolos de actuación en las farmacias comunitarias puede ser de utilidad para identificar y cribar los casos que no requieran tratamiento antibiótico (AU)

Acute pharyngitis in adults is one of the most common infectious diseases seen in general practitioners’ consultations. Viral aetiology is the most common. Among bacterial causes, the main agent is Streptococcus pyogenes or group A β-haemolytic streptococcus (GABHS), which causes 5%-30% of the episodes. In the diagnostic process, clinical assessment scales can help clinicians to better predict suspected bacterial aetiology by selecting patients who should undergo a rapid antigen detection test. If these techniques are not performed, an overdiagnosis of streptococcal pharyngitis often occurs, resulting in unnecessary prescriptions of antibiotics, most of which are broad spectrum. Consequently, management algorithms that include the use of predictive clinical rules and rapid tests have been set up. The aim of the treatment is speeding up symptom resolution, reducing the contagious time span and preventing local suppurative and non-suppurative complications. Penicillin and amoxicillin are the antibiotics of choice for the treatment of pharyngitis. The association of amoxicillin and clavulanate is not indicated as the initial treatment of acute infection. Neither are macrolides indicated as first-line therapy; they should be reserved for patients allergic to penicillin. The appropriate diagnosis of bacterial pharyngitis and proper use of antibiotics based on the scientific evidence available are crucial. Using management algorithms can be helpful in identifying and screening the cases that do not require antibiotic therapy (AU)

Recomendaciones para el manejo de la faringoamigdalitis aguda del adulto / Recommendations for management of acute pharyngitis in adults

La faringoamigdalitis aguda (FAA) en el adulto es una de las enfermedades infecciosas más comunes en la consulta del médico de familia. La etiología más frecuente es viral. Dentro de la etiología bacteriana, el principal agente responsable es Streptococcus pyogenes o estreptococo β-hemolítico del grupo A (EBHGA), causante del 5-30% de los casos. En el manejo diagnóstico, las escalas de valoración clínica para predecir la posible etiología bacteriana, son una buena ayuda para seleccionar a qué pacientes se deben practicar las técnicas de detección rápida de antígeno estreptocócico. Es conocido que, en general, sin estas técnicas se tiende al sobrediagnóstico de FAA estreptocócica, con la consiguiente prescripción innecesaria de antibióticos, muchas veces de amplio espectro. Así, con el manejo de las escalas y la técnica de diagnóstico rápido, elaboramos los algoritmos de manejo de la FAA. Los objetivos del tratamiento son acelerar la resolución de los síntomas, reducir el tiempo de contagio y prevenir las complicaciones supurativas locales y no supurativas. Los antibióticos de elección para el tratamiento de la FAA estreptocócica son penicilina y amoxicilina. La asociación de amoxicilina y clavulánico no está indicada en el tratamiento inicial en la infección aguda. Los macrólidos tampoco son un tratamiento de primera elección; su uso debe reservarse para pacientes con alergia a la penicilina. Es importante en nuestro país adecuar tanto el diagnóstico de la FAA bacteriana y la prescripción de antibióticos a la evidencia científica disponible. La implantación de protocolos de actuación en las farmacias comunitarias puede ser de utilidad para identificar y cribar los casos que no requieran tratamiento antibiótico

Acute pharyngitis in adults is one of the most common infectious diseases seen in general practitioners’ consultations. Viral aetiology is the most common. Among bacterial causes, the main agent isStreptococcus pyogenes or group A β-haemolytic streptococcus (GABHS), which causes 5%-30% of the episodes. In the diagnostic process, clinical assessment scales can help clinicians to better predict suspected bacterial aetiology by selecting patients who should undergo a rapid antigen detection test. If these techniques are not performed, an overdiagnosis of streptococcal pharyngitis often occurs, resulting in unnecessary prescriptions of antibiotics, most of which are broad spectrum. Consequently, management algorithms that include the use of predictive clinical rules and rapid tests have been set up. The aim of the treatment is speeding up symptom resolution, reducing the contagious time span and preventing local suppurative and non-suppurative complications. Penicillin and amoxicillin are the antibiotics of choice for the treatment of pharyngitis. The association of amoxicillin and clavulanate is not indicated as the initial treatment of acute infection. Neither are macrolides indicated as first-line therapy; they should be reserved for patients allergic to penicillin. The appropriate diagnosis of bacterial pharyngitis and proper use of antibiotics based on the scientific evidence available are crucial. Using management algorithms can be helpful in identifying and screening the cases that do not require antibiotic therapy

Recomendaciones para el manejo de la faringoamigdalitis aguda del adulto / Recommendations for management of acute pharyngitis in adults

La faringoamigdalitis aguda (FAA) en el adulto es una de las enfermedades infecciosas más comunes en la consulta del médico de familia. La etiología más frecuente es viral. Dentro de la etiología bacteriana, el principal agente responsable es Streptococcus pyogenes o estreptococo β-hemolítico del grupo A (EBHGA), causante del 5-30% de los casos. En el manejo diagnóstico, las escalas de valoración clínica para predecir la posible etiología bacteriana, son una buena ayuda para seleccionar a qué pacientes se deben practicar las técnicas de detección rápida de antígeno estreptocócico. Es conocido que, en general, sin estas técnicas se tiende al sobrediagnóstico de FAA estreptocócica, con la consiguiente prescripción innecesaria de antibióticos, muchas veces de amplio espectro. Así, con el manejo de las escalas y la técnica de diagnóstico rápido, elaboramos los algoritmos de manejo de la FAA. Los objetivos del tratamiento son acelerar la resolución de los síntomas, reducir el tiempo de contagio y prevenir las complicaciones supurativas locales y no supurativas. Los antibióticos de elección para el tratamiento de la FAA estreptocócica son penicilina y amoxicilina. La asociación de amoxicilina y clavulánico no está indicada en el tratamiento inicial en la infección aguda. Los macrólidos tampoco son un tratamiento de primera elección; su uso debe reservarse para pacientes con alergia a la penicilina. Es importante en nuestro país adecuar tanto el diagnóstico de la FAA bacteriana y la prescripción de antibióticos a la evidencia científica disponible. La implantación de protocolos de actuación en las farmacias comunitarias puede ser de utilidad para identificar y cribar los casos que no requieran tratamiento antibiótico (AU)

Acute pharyngitis in adults is one of the most common infectious diseases seen in general practitioners’ consultations. Viral aetiology is the most common. Among bacterial causes, the main agent isStreptococcus pyogenes or group A β-haemolytic streptococcus (GABHS), which causes 5%-30% of the episodes. In the diagnostic process, clinical assessment scales can help clinicians to better predict suspected bacterial aetiology by selecting patients who should undergo a rapid antigen detection test. If these techniques are not performed, an overdiagnosis of streptococcal pharyngitis often occurs, resulting in unnecessary prescriptions of antibiotics, most of which are broad spectrum. Consequently, management algorithms that include the use of predictive clinical rules and rapid tests have been set up. The aim of the treatment is speeding up symptom resolution, reducing the contagious time span and preventing local suppurative and non-suppurative complications. Penicillin and amoxicillin are the antibiotics of choice for the treatment of pharyngitis. The association of amoxicillin and clavulanate is not indicated as the initial treatment of acute infection. Neither are macrolides indicated as first-line therapy; they should be reserved for patients allergic to penicillin. The appropriate diagnosis of bacterial pharyngitis and proper use of antibiotics based on the scientific evidence available are crucial. Using management algorithms can be helpful in identifying and screening the cases that do not require antibiotic therapy (AU)

[Recommendations for management of acute pharyngitis in adults]. / Recomendaciones para el manejo de la faringoamigdalitis aguda del adulto.

Acute pharyngitis in adults is one of the most common infectious diseases seen in general practitioners' consultations. Viral aetiology is the most common. Among bacterial causes, the main agent is Streptococcus pyogenes or group A ß-haemolytic streptococcus (GABHS), which causes 5%-30% of the episodes. In the diagnostic process, clinical assessment scales can help clinicians to better predict suspected bacterial aetiology by selecting patients who should undergo a rapid antigen detection test. If these techniques are not performed, an overdiagnosis of streptococcal pharyngitis often occurs, resulting in unnecessary prescriptions of antibiotics, most of which are broad spectrum. Consequently, management algorithms that include the use of predictive clinical rules and rapid tests have been set up. The aim of the treatment is speeding up symptom resolution, reducing the contagious time span and preventing local suppurative and non-suppurative complications. Penicillin and amoxicillin are the antibiotics of choice for the treatment of pharyngitis. The association of amoxicillin and clavulanate is not indicated as the initial treatment of acute infection. Neither are macrolides indicated as first-line therapy; they should be reserved for patients allergic to penicillin. The appropriate diagnosis of bacterial pharyngitis and proper use of antibiotics based on the scientific evidence available are crucial. Using management algorithms can be helpful in identifying and screening the cases that do not require antibiotic therapy.