Computerised prescribing: assessing the impact on prescription repeats and on generic substitution of some commonly used antibiotics

Restricting access to antibiotics: The effectiveness of a 'no repeats' government policy intervention

BACKGROUND

Australia has a high rate of antibiotic use. Government policy interventions are one strategy to optimise the use of antibiotics. On 1 April 2020, the Australian Government Department of Health introduced a policy intervention to increase the quality use of four antibiotics.

OBJECTIVES

To assess if the government policy intervention improved the appropriate supply of the four antibiotics amoxicillin, amoxicillin-clavulanic acid, cefalexin and roxithromycin.

METHOD

This study employed a retrospective cohort study design comparing a 10% sample (n = 345,018) of four antibiotics prescribed and dispensed in Australia during a three-month period (May, June, July) in 2019, and again in 2020 (after the policy intervention). The 10% sample of PBS data was obtained from the Australian Government Department of Health. Descriptive statistics, bivariate and multivariable logistic regression analysis were carried out.

RESULTS

The results suggest the policy change improved the appropriate supply of original prescriptions in 2020 compared to 2019 OR = 1.75 (95% CI = 1.68-1.82, p < 0.001), and appropriate supply of repeat prescriptions OR = 1.56 (95% CI = 1.25-1.96, p < 0.001). In 2020, the proportion of appropriate supply of original prescriptions increased by an absolute difference of 1.8% (95% CI = 1.6-1.9%; P < 0.001), and appropriate supply of repeat prescriptions increased by 3.9% (95% CI = 2.2-5.5%; P < 0.001). The total number of antibiotic prescriptions prescribed and dispensed in 2019 (N = 219,960) reduced in 2020 (N = 125,058) after the policy intervention.

CONCLUSION

The study provides evidence for the impact of a government policy intervention to improve the appropriate supply of antibiotics, although some of the reduction in antibiotic use was likely due to the concomitant COVID-19 pandemic. Further research is required to assess the impact of the intervention outside a pandemic.

Pharmacists’ Perceptions Regarding Optimization of Antibiotic Prescribing in the Community

Background and Objective:

The overuse of antibiotics in the community is a primary cause of antibiotic resistance. Community pharmacists are the most accessible health professionals and so they are in an ideal position to implement interventions to ensure the appropriate use of antibiotics. This study aimed to explore the role of community pharmacists in the optimization of antibiotic prescribing and utilization.

Method:

Four focus groups were conducted with community pharmacists in Perth, Western Australia. Audio-recorded data were compared with field notes, transcribed, and thematically analyzed.

Results:

There were twenty-four participants in four focus group sessions. Four main themes were identified: patient perceptions and behaviors, prescribing behaviors, pharmacists’ roles and responsibilities, and health care system interventions in relation to antibiotic utilization. A number of interventions that could be implemented by community pharmacists were identified. In addition to interventions that are currently in place in Australia, forward dispensing, improved interprofessional collaboration, an expansion of current prescribing role, and vaccination capabilities were also suggested.

Conclusions:

This study indicated that current scope of pharmacists’ roles has room for more intervention strategies aimed at improving antibiotic prescribing and utilization in the community.

Antibiotic repeat prescriptions: are patients not re-filling them properly?

Objective

This study aimed to explore patients’ utilization of repeat prescriptions for antibiotics indicated in upper respiratory tract infections (URTI). An emphasis was placed on whether the current system of repeat prescriptions contributes to patients self-diagnosing infections and if so, identify the common reasons for this.

Methods

This is a prospective study of self-reported use of repeat antibiotic prescriptions by pharmacy consumers presenting with repeat prescriptions for antibiotics commonly indicated in URTIs. Data were collected via self-completed surveys in Perth metropolitan pharmacies.

Results

A total of 123 respondents participated in this study from 19 Perth metropolitan pharmacies. Of the respondents, approximately a third of them (33.9%) presented to the pharmacy to fill their antibiotic repeat prescription one month or more from the time the original prescription was written (i.e. time when original diagnosis was made by a doctor). Over two thirds of respondents indicated to not have consulted their doctor prior to presenting to the pharmacy to have their antibiotic repeat prescription dispensed (i.e. 68.3%). The most common reasons for this were that their ‘doctor had told them to take the second course’ (38%), followed by potential self-diagnosis (29%), i.e. ‘they had the same symptoms as the last time they took the antibiotics’. Approximately one third (33.1%) of respondents indicated they ‘were not told what the repeat prescription was needed for’ when they were originally prescribed the antibiotic. Respondents who presented to fill their repeat prescription more than 2 weeks after the original prescription written were more likely not have consulted their doctor (p = 0.006, 95% CI [1.16, 2.01]) and not to know why their repeat was needed (p = 0.010, 95% CI [1.07, 2.18]).

Conclusions

Findings of this study suggested that the current 12 month validity of antibiotics repeat prescriptions is potentially contributing to patients’ self-diagnosis of URTIs and therefore potential misuse of antibiotics. This may be contributing to the rise of antimicrobial resistance. The study also outlines some common reasons for patients potentially self-diagnosing URTIs when using repeat prescriptions. Larger Australian studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Generic drug prices and policy in Australia: room for improvement? a comparative analysis with England

OBJECTIVE

To assess the degree to which reimbursement prices in Australia and England differ for a range of generic drugs, and to analyse the supply- and demand-side factors that may contribute to these differences.

METHODS

Australian and English reimbursement prices were compared for a range of generic drugs using pricing information obtained from government websites. Next, a literature review was conducted to identify supply- and demand-side factors that could affect generic prices in Australia and England. Various search topics were identified addressing potential supply-side (e.g. market approval, intellectual property protection of patented drugs, generic pricing policy, market size, generic supply chain and discounting practices) and demand-side (consumers, prescribers and pharmacists) factors. Related terms were searched in academic databases, official government websites, national statistical databases and internet search engines.

RESULTS

Analysis of drug reimbursement prices for 15 generic molecules (representing 45 different drug presentations) demonstrated that Australian prices were on average over 7-fold higher than in England. Significant supply-side differences included aspects of pricing policy, the relative size of the generics markets and the use of clawback policies. Major differences in demand-side policies related to generic prescribing, pharmacist substitution and consumer incentives.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite recent reforms, the Australian Government continues to pay higher prices than its English counterpart for many generic medications. The results suggest that particular policy areas may benefit from review in Australia, including the length of the price-setting process, the frequency of subsequent price adjustments, the extent of price competition between originators and generics, medical professionals' knowledge about generic medicines and incentives for generic prescribing. WHAT IS KNOWN ABOUT THE TOPIC? Prices of generic drugs have been the subject of much scrutiny over recent years. From 2005 to 2010 the Australian Government responded to observations that Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme prices for many generics were higher than in numerous comparable countries by instituting several reforms aimed at reducing the prices of generics. Despite this, several studies have demonstrated that prices for generic statins (one class of cholesterol-lowering drug) are higher in Australia compared with England and many other developed countries, and prices of numerous other generics remain higher than in the USA and New Zealand. Recently there has been increasing interest in why these differences exist. WHAT DOES THIS PAPER ADD? By including a much larger range of commonly used and costly generic drugs, this paper builds significantly on the limited previous investigations of generic drug prices in Australia and England. Additionally, this is the first comprehensive investigation of multiple supply- and, in particular, demand-side factors that may explain any price differences between these countries. WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTITIONERS? Practitioners may contribute to the higher prices of generic medications in Australia compared with England through relatively low rates of generic prescribing. There are also significant implications for health policy makers, as this paper demonstrates that if Australia achieved the same prices as England for many generic drugs there could be substantial savings for the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme.

Repeatable antibiotic prescriptions: an assessment of patient attitudes, knowledge and advice from health professionals

BACKGROUND

Previous Australian research has identified that general practice software systems appear to be associated with an increase in repeatable antibiotic prescriptions. Such prescriptions potentially facilitate the use of antibiotics without medical consultation and may be inconsistent with attempts to promote prudent use of antimicrobials.

AIMS

We sought to assess knowledge and attitudes to antibiotics amongst patients presenting with a repeatable prescription; and the provision of supporting advice from healthcare professionals regarding use of these repeats.

METHOD

Six community pharmacies across Tasmania invited patients presenting with a repeatable antibiotic prescription to participate in the study. Participants were asked to complete a questionnaire and return this to the research team in a pre-paid envelope.

RESULTS

Fifty-seven of 244 (23 per cent) surveys were returned. Regarding provision of advice on use of the repeat, 14 (25 per cent) of respondents stated that they were given no advice by the prescriber and 19 (30 per cent) no advice from the pharmacist. Five (9 per cent) were given no advice from either prescriber or pharmacist. One-third of respondents indicated that they would keep the repeat for future use and around three-quarters perceived no major safety concerns with antibiotics.

CONCLUSION

Further research is needed, however, this small study suggests that provision of information to patients regarding appropriate use of repeatable antibiotic prescriptions is suboptimal. This coupled with existing patient knowledge and attitudes may contribute to inappropriate use of antibiotics.

Electronic prescribing in pediatrics: toward safer and more effective medication management

This technical report discusses recent advances in electronic prescribing (e-prescribing) systems, including the evidence base supporting their limitations and potential benefits. Specifically, this report acknowledges that there are limited but positive pediatric data supporting the role of e-prescribing in mitigating medication errors, improving communication with dispensing pharmacists, and improving medication adherence. On the basis of these data and on the basis of federal statutes that provide incentives for the use of e-prescribing systems, the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends the adoption of e-prescribing systems with pediatric functionality. This report supports the accompanying policy statement from the American Academy of Pediatrics recommending the adoption of e-prescribing by pediatric health care providers.

Electronic prescribing in pediatrics: toward safer and more effective medication management

This policy statement identifies the potential value of electronic prescribing (e-prescribing) systems in improving quality and reducing harm in pediatric health care. On the basis of limited but positive pediatric data and on the basis of federal statutes that provide incentives for the use of e-prescribing systems, the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends the adoption of e-prescribing systems with pediatric functionality. The American Academy of Pediatrics also recommends a set of functions that technology vendors should provide when e-prescribing systems are used in environments in which children receive care.

Receptionist input to quality and safety in repeat prescribing in UK general practice: ethnographic case study

OBJECTIVE

To describe, explore, and compare organisational routines for repeat prescribing in general practice to identify contributors and barriers to safety and quality.

DESIGN

Ethnographic case study.

SETTING

Four urban UK general practices with diverse organisational characteristics using electronic patient records that supported semi-automation of repeat prescribing.

PARTICIPANTS

395 hours of ethnographic observation of staff (25 doctors, 16 nurses, 4 healthcare assistants, 6 managers, and 56 reception or administrative staff), and 28 documents and other artefacts relating to repeat prescribing locally and nationally.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Potential threats to patient safety and characteristics of good practice.

METHODS

Observation of how doctors, receptionists, and other administrative staff contributed to, and collaborated on, the repeat prescribing routine. Analysis included mapping prescribing routines, building a rich description of organisational practices, and drawing these together through narrative synthesis. This was informed by a sociological model of how organisational routines shape and are shaped by information and communications technologies. Results Repeat prescribing was a complex, technology-supported social practice requiring collaboration between clinical and administrative staff, with important implications for patient safety. More than half of requests for repeat prescriptions were classed as "exceptions" by receptionists (most commonly because the drug, dose, or timing differed from what was on the electronic repeat list). They managed these exceptions by making situated judgments that enabled them (sometimes but not always) to bridge the gap between the idealised assumptions about tasks, roles, and interactions that were built into the electronic patient record and formal protocols, and the actual repeat prescribing routine as it played out in practice. This work was creative and demanded both explicit and tacit knowledge. Clinicians were often unaware of this input and it did not feature in policy documents or previous research. Yet it was sometimes critical to getting the job done and contributed in subtle ways to safeguarding patients. Conclusion Receptionists and administrative staff make important "hidden" contributions to quality and safety in repeat prescribing in general practice, regarding themselves accountable to patients for these contributions. Studying technology-supported work routines that seem mundane, standardised, and automated, but which in reality require a high degree of local tailoring and judgment from frontline staff, opens up a new agenda for the study of patient safety.