Patient Willingness to Have Tests to Guide Antibiotic Use for Respiratory Tract Infections: From the WWAMI Region Practice and Research Network (WPRN).

INTRODUCTION: The majority of consultations for acute respiratory tract infections (RTIs) lead to prescriptions for antibiotics, which have limited clinical benefit. We explored patients' willingness to have blood tests as part of the diagnostic work-up for RTIs, and patient knowledge about antibiotics. METHODS: Patients at 6 family medicine clinics were surveyed. Regression modeling was used to determine independent predictors of willingness to have venous and point-of-care (POC) blood tests, and knowledge of the value of antibiotics for RTIs. RESULTS: Data were collected from 737 respondents (response rate 83.8%), of whom 65.7% were women, 60.1% were white, and 25.1% were current smokers; patients' mean age was 46.9 years. Sex (female), race (white), and a preference to avoid antibiotics were independent predictors of greater level of antibiotic knowledge. A total of 63.1% were willing to have a venous draw and 79% a POC blood test, to help guide antibiotic decision-making. Non-American Indian/Alaskan Native race, current smoking, and greater knowledge of antibiotics were independent predictors of willingness to have a POC test. CONCLUSION: A large majority of patients seemed willing to have POC tests to facilitate antibiotic prescribing decisions for RTIs. Poor knowledge about antibiotics suggests better education regarding antibiotic use might influence patient attitudes towards use of antibiotics for RTIs.

Exploring the barriers and facilitators to use of point of care tests in family medicine clinics in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Point-of-care tests (POCTs) are increasingly used in family medicine clinics in the United States. While the diagnostics industry predicts significant growth in the number and scope of POCTs deployed, little is known about clinic-level attitudes towards implementation of these tests. We aimed to explore attitudes of primary care providers, laboratory and clinic administrative/support staff to identify barriers and facilitators to use of POCTs in family medicine. METHODS: Seven focus groups and four semi-structured interviews were conducted with a total of 52 clinic staff from three family medicine clinics in two US states. Qualitative data from this exploratory study was analyzed using the constant comparison method. RESULTS: Five themes were identified which included the impact of POCTs on clinical decision-making; perceived inaccuracy of POCTs; impact of POCTs on staff and workflow; perceived patient experience and patient-provider relationship, and issues related to cost, regulation and quality control. Overall, there were mixed attitudes towards use of POCTs. Participants believed the added data provided by POCT may facilitate prompt clinical management, diagnostic certainty and patient-provider communication. Perceived barriers included inaccuracy of POCT, shortage of clinic staff to support more testing, and uncertainty about their cost-effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: The potential benefits of using POCTs in family medicine clinics are countered by several barriers. Clinical utility of many POCTs will depend on the extent to which these barriers are addressed. Engagement between clinical researchers, industry, health insurers and the primary care community is important to ensure that POCTs align with clinic and patient needs.