Antibiotic prescription monitoring and feedback in primary care in Switzerland: Design and rationale of a nationwide pragmatic randomized controlled trial

Diagnosis-linked antibiotic prescribing quality indicators: demonstrating feasibility using practice-based routine primary care data, reliability, validity and their potential in antimicrobial stewardship

BACKGROUND

Quality indicators (QIs) can be used to obtain valuable insights into prescribing quality. Five quantitative and nine diagnosis-linked QIs, aiming to provide general practitioners (GP) with feedback on their antibiotic prescribing quantity and quality, were previously developed and evaluated in a controlled study.

OBJECTIVE

To confirm, in a larger non-controlled study, the feasibility of using routinely collected and extracted electronic patient records to calculate the diagnosis-linked QI outcomes for antibiotic prescribing, and their reliability and validity.

METHODS

Retrospective study involving 299 Dutch general practices using routine care data (2018-2020). QIs describe total antibiotic and subgroup prescribing, prescribing percentages and first-choice prescribing for several clinical diagnoses. Practice variation in QI outcomes, inter-QI outcome correlations and sensitivity of QI outcomes to pandemic-induced change were determined.

RESULTS

QI outcomes were successfully obtained for 278/299 practices. With respect to reliability, outcomes for 2018 and 2019 were comparable, between-practice variation in outcomes was similar to the controlled pilot, and inter-QI outcome correlations were as expected, for example: high prescribing of second choice antibiotics with low first-choice prescribing for clinical diagnoses. Validity was confirmed by their sensitivity to pandemic-induced change: total antibiotic prescribing decreased from 282 prescriptions/1000 registered patients in 2018 to 216 in 2020, with a decrease in prescribing percentages for upper and lower respiratory infections, from 26% to 18.5%, and from 28% to 16%.

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirmed the fit-for-purpose (feasibility, reliability and validity) of the antibiotic prescribing QIs (including clinical diagnosis-linked ones) using routinely registered primary health care data as a source. This feedback can therefore be used in antibiotic stewardship programmes to improve GPs' prescribing routines.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on antibiotic prescribing in high-prescribing primary care physicians in Switzerland

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to evaluate antibiotic prescribing of medium-to-high prescribing primary care physicians being followed up after the completion of a Swiss national intervention trial of antibiotic prescription audit and feedback in the first SARS-CoV-2 pandemic year.

METHODS

We used health insurer based claims data to calculate monthly antibiotic prescription rates per 100 consultations (primary endpoint) and applying interrupted time series (ITS) analysis methods, we estimated the immediate (step change) and sustained effects (slope) of the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic in 2020 on antibiotic prescribing compared to the pre-pandemic trial period from 2017-2019.

RESULTS

We analysed data of 2945 of 3426 physicians (86.0%) from the trial with over 4 million consultations annually, who were in 2020 still in practice. Consultations dropped by 43% during the first pandemic year compared with 2017. Median monthly antibiotic prescription rates per 100 consultations in 2017 were 8.44 (Interquartile range [IQ] 6.32-11.50) and 8.35 (6.34-11.74) in the intervention and control groups, respectively, and increased to 15.63 (10.69-23.81) and 16.31 (10.65-24.72) per 100 consultations in 2020. ITS-derived incidence rate ratios for overall antibiotic prescriptions were 2.32 (95% CI 2.07-2.59) for the immediate pandemic effect, and 0.96 (0.95-0.98) for the sustained effect (change in slope in 2020 compared with 2017-2019).

DISCUSSION

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic had a major impact on antibiotic prescription patterns in primary care in Switzerland. For future viral pandemics, intervention plans with timely activation steps to minimize unjustified antibiotic consumption in primary care should be prepared.

Feedback Intervention for the Control of Glucocorticoid Prescription in Primary Care Institutions: A Cluster Randomized Cross-Over Controlled Trial in Southwest China

Purpose

The purpose of this study is to assess the effect of glucocorticoid prescription feedback intervention in complex primary care institutions for regulating its inappropriate use.

Design Setting and Interventions

A six-month cluster randomized cross-over controlled trial was conducted in primary care institutions. A total of 347 physicians from 69 participating institutions were randomly allocated to either group A or group B. Both groups were given feedback interventions or serve as control. The feedback intervention comprised two components: a real-time pop-up warning of inappropriate glucocorticoid prescriptions based on the Hospital Information System and a high-proportion prescription feedback intervention warning system.

Outcome Measures

The primary outcome measure was the 10-day inappropriate glucocorticoid prescription rate, while the 10-day glucocorticoid prescription rate served as secondary outcome measure.

Results

At baseline, the 10-day inappropriate glucocorticoid prescription rates were 66.63% and 66.57% in group A and group B, respectively, showing no significant difference (p = 0.140). Following the intervention, group A exhibited a significant reduction in 10-day inappropriate glucocorticoid prescription rate at the crossing point by 13.69% (p < 0.001). In contrast, group B, which served as the control group, experienced an increase of 5.93% (p = 0.037) at the same crossover point. After the crossover point, there was a decrease in 10-day inappropriate glucocorticoid prescription rate for both groups. Group B as the intervention group demonstrated a reduction of 28.22% compared to the crossing point (p < 0.001), whereas group A showed a decrease of 12.20% (p = 0.339). The characteristics of physicians did not significantly influence the inappropriate glucocorticoid prescription rate.

Conclusion

The real-time pop-up warning of inappropriate glucocorticoid prescriptions based on the Hospital Information System and high-proportion prescription feedback intervention warning system can effectively regulate the inappropriate glucocorticoid prescribing behavior of physicians.

Trial Registration

ISRCTN11747547.

Effect of Antibiotic Prescription Audit and Feedback on Antibiotic Prescribing in Primary Care: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Antibiotics are commonly prescribed in primary care, increasing the risk of antimicrobial resistance in the population.

Objective

To investigate the effect of quarterly audit and feedback on antibiotic prescribing among primary care physicians in Switzerland with medium to high antibiotic prescription rates.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This pragmatic randomized clinical trial was conducted from January 1, 2018, to December 31, 2019, among 3426 registered primary care physicians and pediatricians in single or small practices in Switzerland who were among the top 75% prescribers of antibiotics. Intention-to-treat analysis was performed using analysis of covariance models and conducted from September 1, 2021, to January 31, 2022.

Interventions

Primary care physicians were randomized in a 1:1 fashion to undergo quarterly antibiotic prescribing audit and feedback with peer benchmarking vs no intervention for 2 years, with 2017 used as the baseline year. Anonymized patient-level claims data from 3 health insurers serving roughly 50% of insurees in Switzerland were used for audit and feedback. The intervention group also received evidence-based guidelines for respiratory tract and urinary tract infection management and community antibiotic resistance information. Physicians in the intervention group were blinded regarding the nature of the trial, and physicians in the control group were not informed of the trial.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The claims data used for audit and feedback were analyzed to assess outcomes. Primary outcome was the antibiotic prescribing rate per 100 consultations during the second year of the intervention. Secondary end points included overall antibiotic use in the first year and over 2 years, use of quinolones and oral cephalosporins, all-cause hospitalizations, and antibiotic use in 3 age groups.

Results

A total of 3426 physicians were randomized to the intervention (n = 1713) and control groups (n = 1713) serving 629 825 and 622 344 patients, respectively, with a total of 4 790 525 consultations in the baseline year of 2017. In the entire cohort, a 4.2% (95% CI, 3.9%-4.6%) relative increase in the antibiotic prescribing rate was noted during the second year of the intervention compared with 2017. In the intervention group, the median annual antibiotic prescribing rate per 100 consultations was 8.2 (IQR, 6.1-11.4) in the second year of the intervention and was 8.4 (IQR, 6.0-11.8) in the control group. Relative to the overall increase, a -0.1% (95% CI, -1.2% to 1.0%) lower antibiotic prescribing rate per 100 consultations was found in the intervention group compared with the control group. No relevant reductions in specific antibiotic prescribing rates were noted between groups except for quinolones in the second year of the intervention (-0.9% [95% CI, -1.5% to -0.4%]).

Conclusions and Relevance

This randomized clinical trial found that quarterly personalized antibiotic prescribing audit and feedback with peer benchmarking did not reduce antibiotic prescribing among primary care physicians in Switzerland with medium to high antibiotic prescription rates.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03379194.