Health alliance for prudent prescribing and yield of antibiotics in a patient-centred perspective (HAPPY PATIENT): a before-and-after intervention and implementation study protocol

Background

Excessive and inappropriate use of antibiotics is the most important driver of antimicrobial resistance. The aim of the HAPPY PATIENT project is to evaluate the adaptation of European Union (EU) recommendations on the prudent use of antimicrobials in human health by evaluating the impact of a multifaceted intervention targeting different categories of healthcare professionals (HCPs) on common community-acquired infectious diseases, especially respiratory and urinary tract infections.

Methods/design

HAPPY PATIENT was initiated in January 2021 and is planned to end in December 2023. The partners of this project include 15 organizations from 9 countries. Diverse HCPs (doctors, nurses, pharmacists, and pharmacy technicians) will be audited by the Audit Project Odense (APO) method before and after an intervention in four different settings: general practice, out of hours services, nursing homes and community pharmacies in four high antibiotic prescribing countries (France, Poland, Greece, and Spain) and one low prescribing country (Lithuania). About 25 individuals from each professional group will be recruited in each country, who will register at least 25 patients with community-acquired infections during each audit period. Shortly before the second registration participants will undertake a multifaceted intervention and will receive the results from the first registration to allow the identification of possible quality problems. At these meetings participants will receive training courses on enhancement of communication skills, dissemination of clinical guidelines with recommendations for diagnosis and treatment, posters for the waiting rooms, and leaflets for patients. The results of the second registration will be compared with those obtained in the first audit.

Discussion

HAPPY PATIENT is an EU-funded project aimed at contributing to the battle against antibiotic resistance through improvement of the quality of management of common community-acquired infections based on interventions by different types of HCPs. It is hypothesized that the use of multifaceted strategies combining active intervention will be effective in reducing inappropriate prescribing and dispensing of antibiotics.

Study registration

EU Health programmes project database https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/chafea_pdb/health/projects/900024/summary; date of registration: 1 January 2021.

Does C-reactive protein predict time to recovery and benefit from oseltamivir treatment in primary care patients with influenza-like illness? A randomized controlled trial secondary analysis

OBJECTIVE

Recovery time and treatment effect of oseltamivir in influenza-like illness (ILI) differs between patient groups. A point-of-care test to better predict ILI duration and identify patients who are most likely to benefit from oseltamivir treatment would aid prescribing decisions in primary care. This study aimed to investigate whether a C-reactive protein (CRP) concentration of ≥30 mg/L can predict (1) ILI disease duration, and (2) which patients are most likely to benefit from oseltamivir treatment.

DESIGN

Secondary analysis of randomized controlled trial data.

SETTING

Primary care in Lithuania, Sweden and Norway during three consecutive influenza seasons 2016-2018.

SUBJECTS

A total of 277 ILI patients aged one year or older and symptom duration of ≤72 h.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Capillary blood CRP concentration at baseline, and ILI recovery time defined as having 'returned to usual daily activity' with residual symptoms minimally interfering.

RESULTS

At baseline, 20% (55/277) had CRP concentrations ≥30mg/L (range 0-210). CRP concentration ≥30 mg/L was not associated with recovery time (adjusted hazards ratio (HR) 0.80: 95% CI 0.50-1.3; p = 0.33). Interaction analysis of CRP concentration ≥30 mg/L and oseltamivir treatment did not identify which patients benefit more from oseltamivir treatment (adjusted HR 0.69: 95% CI 0.37-1.3; p = 0.23).

CONCLUSION

There was no association between CRP concentration of ≥30 mg/L and recovery time from ILI. Furthermore, CRP could not predict which ILI patients benefit more from oseltamivir treatment. Hence, we do not recommend CRP testing for predicting ILI recovery time or identifying patients who will receive particular benefit from oseltamivir treatment.Key PointsPredicting disease course of influenza-like illness (ILI), and identifying which patients benefit from oseltamivir treatment is a challenge for physicians.• There was no association between CRP concentration at baseline and recovery time in patients consulting with ILI in primary care.• There was no association between CRP concentration at baseline and benefit from oseltamivir treatment.• We, therefore, do not recommend CRP testing for predicting recovery time or in decision-making concerning oseltamivir prescribing in ILI patients.

Is C-reactive protein associated with influenza A or B in primary care patients with influenza-like illness? A cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVE

Identifying influenza A or B as cause of influenza-like illness (ILI) is a challenge due to non-specific symptoms. An accurate, cheap and easy to use biomarker might enhance targeting influenza-specific management in primary care. The aim of this study was to investigate if C-reactive protein (CRP) is associated with influenza A or B, confirmed with PCR testing, in patients presenting with ILI.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

SETTING

Primary care in Lithuania, Norway and Sweden.

SUBJECTS

A total of 277 patients at least 1 year of age consulting primary care with ILI during seasonal influenza epidemics.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Capillary blood CRP analysed as a point-of-care test and detection of influenza A or B on nasopharyngeal swabs in adults, and nasal and pharyngeal swabs in children using PCR.

RESULTS

The prevalence of positive tests for influenza A among patients was 44% (121/277) and the prevalence of influenza B was 21% (58/277). Patients with influenza A infection could not be identified based on CRP concentration. However, increasing CRP concentration in steps of 10 mg/L was associated with a significantly lower risk for influenza B with an adjusted odds ratio of 0.42 (0.25-0.70; p<.001). Signs of more severe symptoms like shortness of breath, sweats or chills and dizziness were associated with higher CRP.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no association between CRP and influenza A. Increased concentration of CRP was associated with a lower risk for having influenza B, a finding that lacks clinical usefulness. Hence, CRP testing should be avoided in ILI, unless bacterial pneumonia is suspected. Key points Identifying influenza A or B as cause of influenza-like illness (ILI) is a challenge due to non-specific symptoms. There was no association between concentration of CRP and influenza A. Increased concentration of CRP was associated with a lower risk for having influenza B, a finding that lacks clinical usefulness. A consequence is that CRP testing should be avoided in ILI, unless bacterial pneumonia or similar is suspected.

Predictors for antibiotic prescribing in patients with exacerbations of COPD in general practice

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to describe the antibiotic prescribing rate in patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD), to analyse predictors for antibiotic prescribing and to explore the influence of the use C-reactive protein (CRP) rapid test.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was carried out in January and February 2008 in primary care. General practitioners (GPs) from six countries (Denmark, Sweden, Lithuania, Russia, Spain and Argentina) registered all patients with AECOPD during a 3-week period. A multilevel logistic regression model was estimated using two hierarchical levels, (i) patients and (ii) physicians, and was used to analyse the association between antibiotic prescribing and potential predictors for antibiotic use: patients' age and gender, duration and symptoms and signs of exacerbations (fever, cough, dyspnoea, sputum volume and purulence) and the results of the CRP test.

RESULTS

A total of 617 GPs registered 1233 patients with AECOPD. A total of 970 patients (79%) were prescribed antibiotics, varying from 49% (Denmark) to 93% (Russia). The presence of purulent sputum was the strongest predictor for antibiotic treatment (odds ratio [OR] 8.7; 95% confidence interval [CI] 5.9-12.8). CRP determination was carried out mainly in Denmark and Sweden and its use was the strongest protective factor for antibiotic therapy (OR 0.3; 95% CI 0.2-0.6). GPs that used CRP testing weighted purulent sputum lower than GPs who did not use CRP testing. CRP values had a strong influence on the antibiotic prescribing rate.

CONCLUSIONS

Antibiotic treatment for AECOPD is very high. This study shows that GPs performing CRP rapid tests prescribe fewer antibiotics than those who do not.

Health Alliance for prudent antibiotic prescribing in patients with respiratory tract infections (HAPPY AUDIT) -impact of a non-randomised multifaceted intervention programme

Background

Excessive use of antibiotics is worldwide the most important reason for development of antimicrobial resistance. As antibiotic resistance may spread across borders, high prevalence countries may serve as a source of bacterial resistance for countries with a low prevalence. Therefore, bacterial resistance is an important issue with a potential serious impact on all countries. Initiatives have been taken to improve the quality of antibiotic prescribing in primary care, but only few studies have been designed to determine the effectiveness of multifaceted strategies across countries with different practice setting. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of a multifaceted intervention targeting general practitioners (GPs) and patients in six countries with different health organization and different prevalence of antibiotic resistance.

Methods

GPs from two Nordic countries, two Baltic Countries and two Hispano-American countries registered patients with respiratory tract infections (RTIs) in 2008 and 2009. After first registration they received individual prescriber feedback and they were offered an intervention programme that included training courses, clinical guidelines, posters for waiting rooms, patient brochures and access to point of care tests (Strep A and C-Reactive Protein). Antibiotic prescribing rates were compared before and after the intervention.

Results

A total of 440 GPs registered 47011 consultations; 24436 before the intervention (2008) and 22575 after the intervention (2009). After the intervention, the GPs significantly reduced the percentage of consultations resulting in an antibiotic prescription. In patients with lower RTI the GPs in Lithuania reduced the prescribing rate by 42%, in Russia by 25%, in Spain by 25%, and in Argentina by 9%. In patients with upper RTIs, the corresponding reductions in the antibiotic prescribing rates were in Lithania 20%, in Russia 15%, in Spain 9%, and in Argentina 5%.

Conclusion

A multifaceted intervention programme targeting GPs and patients and focusing on improving diagnostic procedures in patients with RTIs may lead to a marked reduction in antibiotic prescribing. The pragmatic before-after design used may suffer from some limitations and the reduction in antibiotic prescribing could be influenced by factors not related to the intervention.