Antimicrobial prescribing in the USA for adult acute pharyngitis in relation to treatment guidelines

Antimicrobial prescription pattern and appropriateness for respiratory tract infection in outpatients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Millions of people die every year as a result of antimicrobial resistance worldwide. An inappropriate prescription of antimicrobials (e.g., overuse, inadequate use, or a choice that diverges from established guidelines) can lead to a heightened risk of antimicrobial resistance. This study aimed to determine the rate and appropriateness of antimicrobial prescriptions for respiratory tract infections.

METHODS

This review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Web of Science, PubMed, ProQuest Health and Medicine, and Scopus were searched between October 1, 2023, and December 15, 2023, with no time constraints. Studies were independently screened by the first author and the co-authors. We included original studies reporting antimicrobial prescription patterns and appropriateness for respiratory tract infections. The quality of included studies' was assessed via the Joanna Briggs Institute's Critical Appraisal Checklists for Cross-Sectional Studies. The assessment of publication bias was conducted using a funnel plot and Egger's regression test. A random effect model was employed to estimate the pooled antibiotic prescribing and inappropriate rates. Subgroup analysis was conducted by country, study period, data source, and age group.

RESULTS

Of the total 1220 identified studies, 36 studies were included in the review. The antimicrobial prescribing rate ranged from 25% (95% CI 0.24-0.26) to 90% (95% CI 0.89-0.91). The pooled antimicrobial prescription rate was 66% (95% CI 0.57 to 0.73). Subgroup analysis by region revealed that the antimicrobial prescription rate was highest in Africa (79%, 95% CI 0.48-0.94) and lowest in Europe (47%, 95% CI 0.32-0.62). Amoxicillin and amoxicillin-clavulanate antimicrobials from the Access group, along with azithromycin and erythromycin from the Watch group, were the most frequently used antimicrobial agents. This study revealed that the major reasons for antimicrobial prescription were acute bronchitis, pharyngitis, sinusitis, and the common cold. The pooled inappropriate antimicrobial prescription rate was 45% (95% CI 0.38-0.52). Twenty-eight of the included studies reported that prescribing antimicrobials without proper indications was the main cause of inappropriate antimicrobial prescriptions. Additionally, subgroup analysis by region showed a higher inappropriate antimicrobial prescription rate in Asia at 49% (95% CI 0.38-0.60). The result of the funnel plot and Egger's tests revealed no substantial publication bias (Egger's test: p = 0.268).

CONCLUSION

The prescribing rate and inappropriate use of antimicrobials remain high and vary among countries. Further studies should be conducted to generate information about factors contributing to unnecessary antimicrobial prescriptions in outpatients.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

Systematic review registration: CRD42023468353.

Antibiotic consumption for sore throat and the potential effect of a vaccine against group A Streptococcus: a systematic review and modelling study

BACKGROUND

Antibiotic consumption can lead to antimicrobial resistance and microbiome imbalance. We sought to estimate global antibiotic consumption for sore throat, and the potential reduction in consumption due to effective vaccination against group A Streptococcus (Strep A).

METHODS

We reviewed and analysed articles published between January 2000 and February 2022, identified though Clarivate Analytics' Web of Science search platform, with reference to antibiotic prescribing or consumption, sore throat, pharyngitis, or tonsillitis. We then used those analyses, combined with assumptions for the effectiveness, duration of protection, and coverage of a vaccine, to calculate the estimated reduction in antibiotic prescribing due to the introduction of Strep A vaccines.

FINDINGS

We identified 101 studies covering 38 countries. The mean prescribing rate for sore throat was approximately 5 courses per 100 population per year, accounting for approximately 5% of all antibiotic consumption. Based on 2020 population estimates for countries with empiric prescribing rates, antibiotic consumption for sore throat was estimated to exceed 37 million courses annually, of which half could be attributable to treatment for Strep A. A vaccine that reduces rates of Strep A infection by 80%, with 80% coverage and 10 year's duration of protection, could avert 2.8 million courses of antibiotics prescribed for sore throat treatment among 5-14 year-olds in countries with observed prescribing rates, increasing to an estimated 7.5 million averted if an effective vaccination program also reduced precautionary prescribing.

INTERPRETATION

A vaccine that prevents Strep A throat infections in children may reduce antibiotic prescribing for sore throat by 32-87% depending on changes to prescribing and consumption behaviours.

FUNDING

The Wellcome Trust, grant agreement number 215490/Z/19/Z.

Appropriateness of antibiotic treatment of acute respiratory tract infections in Tunisian primary care and emergency departments: a multicenter cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the pattern and appropriateness of antibiotic prescriptions in patients with acute respiratory tract infections (ARTIs).

OBJECTIVE

Describe the antibiotics used to treat ARTIs in Tunisian primary care offices and emergency departments (EDs), and assess the appropriateness of their use.

METHODS

It was a prospective multicenter cross-sectional observational clinical study conducted at 63 primary care offices and 6 EDS during a period of 8 months. Appropriateness of antibiotic prescription was evaluated by trained physicians using the medication appropriateness index (MAI). The MAI ratings generated a weighted score of 0 to 18 with higher scores indicating low appropriateness. The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and national and institutional standards. The study was approved by the Ethics committee of Monastir Medical Faculty.

RESULTS

From the 12,880 patients screened we included 9886 patients. The mean age was 47.4, and 55.4% were men. The most frequent diagnosis of ARTI was were acute bronchitis (45.3%), COPD exacerbation (16.3%), tonsillitis (14.6%), rhinopharyngitis (12.2%) and sinusitis (11.5%). The most prescribed classes of antibiotics were penicillins (58.3%), fluoroquinolones (17.6%), and macrolides (16.9%). Antibiotic therapy was inappropriate in 75.5% of patients of whom 65.2% had bronchitis. 65% of patients had one or more antibiotic prescribing inappropriateness criteria as assessed by the MAI. The most frequently rated criteria were with expensiveness (75.8%) and indication (40%). Amoxicillin-clavulanic acid and levofloxacin were the most inappropriately prescribed antibiotics. History of cardiac ischemia ([OR] 3.66; 95% [CI] 2.17-10.26; p < 0.001), asthma ([OR] 3.29, 95% [CI] 1.77-6.13; p < 0.001), diabetes ([OR] 2.09, 95% [CI] 1.54-2.97; p = 0.003), history of COPD ([OR] 1.75, 95% [CI] 1.43-2.15; p < 0.001) and age > 65 years (Odds Ratio [OR] 1.35, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.16-1.58; p < 0.001) were associated with a higher likelihood of inappropriate prescribing.

CONCLUSION

Our findings indicate a high inappropriate use of antibiotics in ARTIs treated in in primary care and EDs. This was mostly related to antibiotic prescription in acute bronchitis and overuse of expensive broad spectrum antibiotics. Future interventions to improve antibiotic prescribing in primary care and EDs is needed.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

the trial is registered at Clinicaltrials.gov registry (NCT04482231).

Antibiotic Prescribing in Adults Presenting with Pharyngitis Pre- and Post-Implementation of a Rapid Group A Streptococcus Test

Background: Group A Streptococcus (GAS) pharyngitis is the most common bacterial cause of acute pharyngitis and is often over treated with unnecessary antibiotics. The purpose was to evaluate if implementation of a rapid antigen detection test (RADT) for GAS would reduce the number of inappropriately prescribed antibiotics for adult patients presenting with symptoms of pharyngitis. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of adult urgent care clinic patients pre- and post-implementation of a GAS RADT. We included patients who had a diagnosis of GAS identified via ICD-10 codes and either a throat culture, GAS RADT, or antibiotic prescribed for GAS. Antibiotic prescribing was assessed as appropriate or inappropriate based on testing and IDSA guideline recommendations. Thirty-day follow-up visits related to pharyngitis or the prescribed antibiotics was also evaluated. Results: A total of 1734 patients were included; 912 and 822 in the pre- and post-implementation groups, respectively. Following implementation of the GAS RADT, there was an increase in the number of antibiotics prescribed for GAS (43.4% vs 59.1%, P < .001) as well as an increase in appropriate prescribing (67.6% vs 77.5%, P < .001). More 30-day pharyngitis-related follow-up visits were seen in the pre-intervention group (12.5% vs 9.3%, P = .03). Conclusion: Implementation of a RADT for GAS pharyngitis was associated with an increase in both the overall number of antibiotic prescriptions for GAS and the proportion of appropriately prescribed antibiotics. There was also a reduction in follow up visits related to GAS pharyngitis, however educational efforts to further increase appropriate prescribing is needed.

Efficacy and safety of rapid tests to guide antibiotic prescriptions for sore throat

BACKGROUND

Sore throat is a common condition caused by viruses or bacteria, and is a leading cause of antibiotic prescription in primary care. The most common bacterial species is group A streptococcus ('strep throat'). Between 50% to 70% of pharyngitis cases are treated with antibiotics, despite the majority of cases being viral in origin. One strategy to reduce antibiotics is to use rapid tests for group A streptococcus to guide antibiotic prescriptions. Rapid tests can be used alone or in combination with a clinical scoring system.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of strategies based on rapid tests to guide antibiotic prescriptions for sore throat in primary care settings.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, and LILACS, as well as the trial registries ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO ICTRP on 5 June 2019.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing rapid tests with management based on clinical grounds to guide the prescription of antibiotics for people with a sore throat in ambulatory care settings. We included trials that randomised individuals, as well as cluster-RCTs in which individual practitioners (or practices) or emergency departments were randomised.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data on the primary outcomes (number of participants provided with an antibiotic prescription; number of participants with an antibiotic dispensed) and secondary outcomes (duration of sore throat symptoms; duration of other symptoms; quality of life measures; number of participants with a complication attributed to the index infection; number of participants in need of re-consultation by the end of follow-up; number of participants in need of hospital admission by the end of follow-up; number of satisfied participants; number of participants with an adverse event attributed to the rapid test). We assessed the risk of bias of all included trials and used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence. We performed meta-analyses and sensitivity analyses when feasible.

MAIN RESULTS

We included five trials (2891 children and adult participants in total; 2545 participants after adjusting for clustering). Management in the intervention group was as follows: in three trials rapid tests were used in combination with a clinical scoring system; in one trial, some physicians were asked to use rapid tests alone, while others were asked to use rapid tests in combination with a clinical scoring system; in one trial, rapid tests were used alone. Based on data from five trials (2545 participants), a large reduction in prescribed antibiotics was found in the rapid test group (481/1197) versus management based on clinical grounds (865/1348), for a summary risk difference (RD) of -25%, 95% confidence interval (CI) -31% to -18%; I2 = 62%; moderate-certainty evidence. Estimates of effect on antibiotic prescription rates were stable in various sensitivity analyses. Based on data from two trials (900 people) originating from the same overarching study, the evidence suggests that rapid tests may not reduce dispensed antibiotic treatments: rapid test group (156/445) versus management based on clinical grounds (197/455); summary RD -7%, 95% CI -17% to 2%; I2 = 53%; low-certainty evidence. Four trials (2075 participants) reported data on the number of participants with a complication attributed to the index infection; the summary odds ratio (OR) was 0.85, 95% CI 0.03 to 26.65; P = 0.93; I2 = 62%; very low-certainty evidence, which means that people in the rapid testing group were less likely to develop complications of the index infection, but the evidence is very uncertain. Two trials (1161 participants) reported on the number of participants in need of re-consultation by the end of follow-up; the summary OR was 1.12, 95% CI 0.57 to 2.21; P = 0.74; I2 = 59%; low-certainty evidence, which means that participants in the rapid testing group were more likely to be in need of re-consultation by the end of the study follow-up, but the evidence is uncertain. Lack of data impeded assessment of other secondary outcomes (including safety outcomes) and of sources of heterogeneity.  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Rapid testing to guide antibiotic treatment for sore throat in primary care probably reduces antibiotic prescription rates by 25% (absolute risk difference), but may have little or no impact on antibiotic dispensing. More studies are needed to assess the efficacy and safety of rapid test-guided antibiotic prescribing, notably to evaluate patient-centred outcomes and variability across subgroups (e.g. adults versus children).

Evaluation of uncomplicated acute respiratory tract infection management in veterans: A national utilization review

BACKGROUND

Antibiotics are overprescribed for acute respiratory tract infections (ARIs). Guidelines provide criteria to determine which patients should receive antibiotics. We assessed congruence between documentation of ARI diagnostic and treatment practices with guideline recommendations, treatment appropriateness, and outcomes.

METHODS

A multicenter quality improvement evaluation was conducted in 28 Veterans Affairs facilities. We included visits for pharyngitis, rhinosinusitis, bronchitis, and upper respiratory tract infections (URI-NOS) that occurred during the 2015-2016 winter season. A manual record review identified complicated cases, which were excluded. Data were extracted for visits meeting criteria, followed by analysis of practice patterns, guideline congruence, and outcomes.

RESULTS

Of 5,740 visits, 4,305 met our inclusion criteria: pharyngitis (n = 558), rhinosinusitis (n = 715), bronchitis (n = 1,155), URI-NOS (n = 1,475), or mixed diagnoses (&gt;1 ARI diagnosis) (n = 402). Antibiotics were prescribed in 68% of visits: pharyngitis (69%), rhinosinusitis (89%), bronchitis (86%), URI-NOS (37%), and mixed diagnosis (86%). Streptococcal diagnostic testing was performed in 33% of pharyngitis visits; group A Streptococcus was identified in 3% of visits. Streptococcal tests were ordered less frequently for patients who received antibiotics (28%) than those who did not receive antibiotics 44%; P &lt; .01). Although 68% of visits for rhinosinusitis had documentation of symptoms, only 32% met diagnostic criteria for antibiotics. Overall, 39% of patients with uncomplicated ARIs received appropriate antibiotic management. The proportion of 30-day return visits for ARI care was similar for appropriate (11%) or inappropriate (10%) antibiotic management (P = .22).

CONCLUSIONS

Antibiotics were prescribed in most uncomplicated ARI visits, indicating substantial overuse. Practice was frequently discordant with guideline diagnostic and treatment recommendations.

Prevalence of Inappropriate Antibiotic Prescribing in Primary Care Clinics within a Veterans Affairs Health Care System

Data are needed from outpatient settings to better inform antimicrobial stewardship. In this study, a random sample of outpatient antibiotic prescriptions by primary care providers (PCPs) at our health care system was reviewed and compared to consensus guidelines. Over 12 months, 3,880 acute antibiotic prescriptions were written by 76 PCPs caring for 40,734 patients (median panel, 600 patients; range, 33 to 1,547). PCPs ordered a median of 84 antibiotic prescriptions per 1,000 patients per year. Azithromycin (25.8%), amoxicillin-clavulanate (13.3%), doxycycline (12.4%), amoxicillin (11%), fluoroquinolones (11%), and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (10.6%) were prescribed most commonly. Medical records corresponding to 300 prescriptions from 59 PCPs were analyzed in depth. The most common indications for these prescriptions were acute respiratory tract infection (28.3%), urinary tract infection (23%), skin and soft tissue infection (15.7%), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbation (6.3%). In 5.7% of cases, no reason for the prescription was listed. No antibiotic was indicated in 49.7% of cases. In 12.3% of cases, an antibiotic was indicated, but the prescribed agent was guideline discordant. In another 14% of cases, a guideline-concordant antibiotic was given for a guideline-discordant duration. Therefore, 76% of reviewed prescriptions were inappropriate. Ciprofloxacin and azithromycin were most likely to be prescribed inappropriately. A non-face-to-face encounter prompted 34% of prescriptions. The condition for which an antibiotic was prescribed was not listed in primary or secondary diagnosis codes in 54.5% of clinic visits. In conclusion, there is an enormous opportunity to reduce inappropriate outpatient antibiotic prescriptions.

Clinical Impact of a Rapid Streptococcal Antigen Test on Antibiotic Use in Adult Patients

INTRODUCTION

Adult pharyngitis is rarely attributable to group A streptococci. Utilization of a rapid streptococcal antigen test (RADT) may improve appropriate prescribing for bacterial pharyngitis.

METHODS

Clinic 1 performed RADTs with subsequent Group A DNA probe test (GADNA) from November 2014-March 2015 and November 2015-March 2016 while Clinic 2 was the control clinic, then implemented the RADT with a GADNA from November 2015-March 2016. All GADNA results were obtained for each clinic from October 2013-March 2016.

RESULTS

At Clinic 1, 22.2% versus 8.5% of patients received inappropriately prescribed antibiotics for a GADNA or RADT result, respectively (p=0.048). For Clinic 2, 51.1% compared to 21.4% of patients were inappropriately prescribed antibiotic for a GADNA or RADT result, respectively (p=0.038). Overall, the total GADNA without RADT testing or RADTs with subsequent GADNA testing, 41.6% versus 11% of patients were inappropriately prescribed antibiotics, respectively (p=<0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Utilizing the RADT prevented unnecessary prescribing of antibiotics in adults.

Utilization of influenza and streptococcal pharyngitis point-of-care testing in the community pharmacy practice setting

BACKGROUND

One way to reduce the complications and costs of influenza like illness and pharyngitis is to improve access to testing and treatment in early stages of infection. Pharmacy-based screening and treatment of group A streptococcus (GAS) infection and influenza has the potential to improve patient care and population health.

OBJECTIVE

To improve patient care and population health, the objective of this retrospective study was to assess if a previously validated service model could be implemented by pharmacy chains without mandated standardization.

METHODS

Researchers utilized a certificate program to provide initial training to pharmacists and shared templates from previous validated models. Pharmacy companies were responsible for navigation of all implementation within their company. Researchers analyzed the de-identified data from patients seeking point-of-care testing from the participating pharmacies.

RESULTS

Participating pharmacies reported 661 visits for adult (age 18 and over) patients tested for influenza for GAS pharyngitis. For the GAS patients, 91 (16.9%) tested positive. For the Influenza patients, 22.9% tested positive and 64 (77.1%) testing negative. Access to care was improved as patients presented to the visit outside normal clinic hours for 38% of the pharmacy visits, and 53.7% did not have a primary care provider.

CONCLUSION

A collaborative care model for managing patients with symptoms consistent with influenza or group A streptococcus can be successfully implemented, and improve access to care outside of normal clinic hours and for those without a regular primary care provider.

Effects of knowledge, attitudes, and practices of primary care providers on antibiotic selection, United States

Primary care providers were familiar with recommendations for antibiotic drug selection for common infections, but do not always comply with them.

Appropriate selection of antibiotic drugs is critical to optimize treatment of infections and limit the spread of antibiotic resistance. To better inform public health efforts to improve prescribing of antibiotic drugs, we conducted in-depth interviews with 36 primary care providers in the United States (physicians, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants) to explore knowledge, attitudes, and self-reported practices regarding antibiotic drug resistance and antibiotic drug selection for common infections. Participants were generally familiar with guideline recommendations for antibiotic drug selection for common infections, but did not always comply with them. Reasons for nonadherence included the belief that nonrecommended agents are more likely to cure an infection, concern for patient or parent satisfaction, and fear of infectious complications. Providers inconsistently defined broad- and narrow-spectrum antibiotic agents. There was widespread concern for antibiotic resistance; however, it was not commonly considered when selecting therapy. Strategies to encourage use of first-line agents are needed in addition to limiting unnecessary prescribing of antibiotic drugs.

Race/Ethnicity and overuse of care: a systematic review

POLICY POINTS: Racial/ethnic differences in the overuse of care (specifically, unneeded care that does not improve patients' outcomes) have received little scholarly attention. Our systematic review of the literature (59 studies) found that the overuse of care is not invariably associated with race/ethnicity, but when it was, a substantial proportion of studies found greater overuse of care among white patients. The absence of established subject terms in PubMed for the overuse of care or inappropriate care impedes the ability of researchers or policymakers to synthesize prior scientific or policy efforts.

CONTEXT

The literature on disparities in health care has examined the contrast between white patients receiving needed care, compared with racial/ethnic minority patients not receiving needed care. Racial/ethnic differences in the overuse of care, that is, unneeded care that does not improve patients' outcomes, have received less attention. We systematically reviewed the literature regarding race/ethnicity and the overuse of care.

METHODS

We searched the Medline database for US studies that included at least 2 racial/ethnic groups and that examined the association between race/ethnicity and the overuse of procedures, diagnostic (care) or therapeutic care. In a recent review, we identified studies of overuse by race/ethnicity, and we also examined reference lists of retrieved articles. We then abstracted and evaluated this information, including the population studied, data source, sample size and assembly, type of care, guideline or appropriateness standard, controls for clinical confounding and financing of care, and findings.

FINDINGS

We identified 59 unique studies, of which 11 had a low risk of methodological bias. Studies with multiple outcomes were counted more than once; collectively they assessed 74 different outcomes. Thirty-two studies, 6 with low risks of bias (LRoB), provided evidence that whites received more inappropriate or nonrecommended care than racial/ethnic minorities did. Nine studies (2 LRoB) found evidence of more overuse of care by minorities than by whites. Thirty-three studies (6 LRoB) found no relationship between race/ethnicity and overuse.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the overuse of care is not invariably associated with race/ethnicity, when it was, a substantial proportion of studies found greater overuse of care among white patients. Clinicians and researchers should try to understand how and why race/ethnicity might be associated with overuse and to intervene to reduce it.

Linking evidence-based nursing practice and patient-centered care through patient preferences

Calls for both patient-centered care and evidence-based practice (EBP) have increased dramatically over the last decade despite a tension between the two. Patient preferences, one of the cornerstones of EBP, can provide the link between the two. Although current research supports the added value of patient preferences in care, there is currently a "gap" between EBP and patient-centered care, with the two often viewed as opposing ideas. The purpose of this article is to provide an overview of patient preferences, summarize research on patient preferences, and discuss implications for nursing and nursing administration. Efforts to incorporate patient preferences into nursing care must be multifaceted, targeting multiple levels from individual nurses to organizations and systems. Four critical elements have been identified for integrating patient preferences into EBP: (1) health care redesign, (2) decision support, (3) empowered organizational culture, and (4) informed and empowered nurses.