89004882274BMJBMJBMJ (Clinical research ed.)0959-81381756-183330420401651197210.1136/bmj.k3047HHSPA1024663ArticleAdvances in optimizing antibiotic prescribing in outpatient settingsKingLaura MMPHHealth Research AnalystFleming-DutraKatherine EMDDeputy DirectorHicksLauri ADODirectorDivision of Healthcare Quality Promotion, National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road NE, Mailstop A-31 Atlanta, GA, 30329, United States
Contributorship statement and guarantor:
Ms. King, Dr. Fleming-Dutra, and Dr. Hicks all made substantial contributions to the conception of the manuscript, approved the final version of this manuscript, and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work. Ms. King conceptualized the review, performed the literature review and wrote the article. Dr. Fleming-Dutra and Dr. Hicks conceptualized the review and provided critical revisions for important intellectual content. Dr. Hicks, as guarantor, accepts full responsibility for the work, had access to the references reviewed, and controlled the decision to publish. The corresponding author attests that all listed authors meet authorship criteria and that no others meeting the criteria have been omitted.
Correspondence to: L M King lfq0@cdc.gov352019121120181211201812112019363k3047k3047Licence: This work was conducted by employees of the US Federal Government. For employees of the US Federal Government employees acting in the course of their employment, no copyright exists and the Contribution is in the public domain so no licence is required to be granted
Inappropriate antibiotic use can increase the likelihood of antibiotic resistance and adverse events. Nearly a third of US outpatient antibiotic prescriptions are unnecessary, and outpatient antibiotic selection and duration are often inappropriate as well. Evidence shows that antibiotic prescribing is influenced by psychosocial factors, including lack of accountability, perceived patient expectations, clinician workload and habit. A varied and growing body of evidence that includes meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials, and qualitative studies has evaluated interventions to optimize antibiotic use. Interventions informed by behavioral science, such as communication skills training, audit and feedback with peer comparison, public commitment posters, and accountable justification, have been associated with improved antibiotic prescribing. Additionally, delayed prescribing and active monitoring and the use of diagnostics are guideline-recommended practices that improve antibiotic use for some conditions. In 2016, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released the Core Elements of Outpatient Antibiotic Stewardship, which provides a framework for implementing these interventions in the outpatient settings. This review summarizes the varied evidence on drivers of inappropriate outpatient antibiotic prescribing and potential interventions to improve outpatient antibiotic use.
Introduction
Antibiotics are life-saving drugs that have enabled advances in modern medicine. However, the more antibiotics are used, the less effective they become. Antibiotic resistance is an important global public health threat.1 Additionally, antibiotics are associated with adverse events ranging from mild gastrointestinal distress to life-threatening Clostridium difficile infections. Antibiotic stewardship is the measurement and optimization of antibiotic use and includes not only ensuring that antibiotics are given only when necessary and beneficial, but also, when antibiotics are needed, that the right agent, dose, and duration are used. In addition, antibiotic stewardship emphasizes initiating antibiotics promptly when needed, such as when sepsis is suspected. The goal of antibiotic stewardship is to optimize patient safety and outcomes.
Globally, up to 95% of all antibiotics for humans are prescribed in outpatient settings, including physician offices, urgent care facilities, retail health clinics, and emergency departments.23 In 2015, in the United States, enough outpatient antibiotic prescriptions were dispensed for five out of every six people to receive an antibiotic course.4 Historically, much of the focus on antibiotic stewardship has been in hospitals. However, there has been a recent surge of research in outpatient settings and, in 2016, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) published the Core Elements of Outpatient Antibiotic Stewardship5 (fig 1) to provide a framework for US outpatient clinicians and facilities to improve antibiotic use.
The aim of this review is to synthesize the growing literature examining the causes of inappropriate antibiotic prescribing and potential antibiotic stewardship interventions in outpatient settings. To contextualize this literature, this review also provides a brief overview of the consequences and epidemiology of outpatient antibiotic prescribing.
Sources and selection criteria
The references for this review were identified through PubMed searches, author libraries, and reference lists from CDC publications. Our PubMed search was limited to English-language publications published in peer-reviewed journals from January 2012 to November 2017. Search terms included “antimicrobial stewardship” AND “outpatient”, “antimicrobial stewardship” AND “primary care”, and “antimicrobial stewardship review.” We reviewed relevant titles and abstracts from this search and included meta-analyses, systematic reviews, randomized controlled-trials, and large descriptive and observational studies. Where those types of studies were limited or where other study types yielded richer data, for example in examining the drivers of inappropriate prescribing, we included qualitative and small observational studies. We included older (pre-2012) references from author libraries and CDC reference lists if they were highly cited, complemented or contextualized recent studies, or if recent literature on the topic was limited. We also included relevant government documents and resources from author libraries. We included studies from both US and non-US settings. In discussing drivers of inappropriate prescribing and potential interventions, we note studies from outside the US. During the peer review process, two studies with new information on topics described here were published. Based on the novelty of the information in these studies and their relevance to this topic, we included them in this review.
By its nature, this narrative review may suffer from selection bias. We did not include gray literature or studies published in languages other than English and we limited published studies to those available in PubMed or already in author libraries. Thus, there may be additional references omitted here which provide further insight.
Why outpatient antibiotic use needs to be improved
Antibiotic use selects for antibiotic-resistant bacteria; antibiotic-resistant organisms infect at least 2 million people, cause at least 23,000 deaths, and result in $20 billion in excess direct healthcare costs in the United States each year.6 For some pathogens, such as carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae, treatment options are becoming increasingly limited, increasing the risk of patient morbidity and mortality and treatment costs. Antibiotic use and resistance are associated both at population and individual levels. Antibiotic resistance patterns for selected antibiotic-pathogen combinations have been observed to change in parallel with shifting antibiotic consumption patterns in a population.7–9 At the individual level, the odds of identifying antibiotic-resistant bacteria (colonization or infection) are over twice as high among those with recent antibiotic exposure compared to those without antibiotic exposure.10 Antibiotic-associated adverse drug events (ADEs) are a threat to patient safety. Antibiotic-associated ADEs include gastrointestinal disturbances, nephrotoxicity, secondary infections (including yeast and C difficile infections), neurological or psychiatric effects, sensory or motor disturbances, and allergic reactions. CDC estimates that one emergency department visit for an antibiotic-associated ADE occurs for every 1,000 outpatient antibiotic prescriptions.11
Clostridium difficile infection is a life-threatening antibiotic-associated ADE. C difficile caused an estimated 450,000 infections and 15,000 deaths in 2011 in the United States.12 In 2015, estimated US annual acute-care costs attributable to C difficile infection were $1.2–5.9 billion.13 Antibiotic use is a well-known risk factor for C difficile infection14 and reducing outpatient antibiotic prescription rates by 10% could result in an estimated 17% decrease in C difficile infection rates.15 Reductions in specific antibiotics, including fluoroquinolones and cephalosporins, are especially impactful in preventing C difficile infection.816
Certain antibiotics commonly used in outpatient settings are of special concern due to their association with severe ADEs. Azithromycin is the most frequently prescribed antibiotic in outpatient settings17 and is often inappropriately prescribed for conditions for which it is not a recommended first-line treatment or antibiotics are not indicated.18 In 2013, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) warned that azithromycin can lead to potentially fatal heart rhythm irregularities.19 Fluoroquinolones are also commonly used in outpatient settings, often inappropriately.20 In 2016, FDA updated its warning on fluoroquinolones due to disabling and permanent side effects, including tendonitis, tendon rupture, worsening of myasthenia gravis, peripheral neuropathy, and central nervous system effects.21 FDA recommended that fluoroquinolones be avoided in acute sinusitis, acute bronchitis, and uncomplicated urinary tract infections.21
An emerging focus is the impact of antibiotics on the microbiome, the population of microorganisms in the body, and related health impacts. Antibiotic use can result in loss of diversity and disturbances in the microbiome that can persist for years. Current evidence is limited, but indicates that early-life antibiotic use may be associated with increased risk of chronic diseases, such as juvenile idiopathic arthritis,22 celiac disease,23 inflammatory bowel disease,24 diabetes,25 and food allergies,26 likely mediated through disruption in the microbiome.27 For these conditions, increasing numbers of antibiotic courses correspond with increasing likelihood of disease.22–26 Additionally, use of antibiotics in livestock growth promotion has prompted researchers to study the relationship between antibiotics and obesity in humans. Although nascent, much of the data on childhood antibiotic use and body mass, overweight, obesity, and/or weight gain shows an association.28–33 However, a recent observational study of over 38,000 children followed to age 7 found that antibiotic use within the first 6 months of life was not associated with later weight gain.34
US outpatient antibiotic prescribing
In 2015, 269 million antibiotic prescriptions, equivalent to 838 antibiotic prescriptions per 1,000 population, were dispensed from US community pharmacies, making the outpatient setting an important target for improving antibiotic use.4 In fact, the US National Action Plan for Combating Antibiotic Resistant Bacteria, released in 2015, set a goal to reduce inappropriate antibiotic use in the outpatient setting by 50% by 2020.35 Inappropriate antibiotic use includes unnecessary use (using antibiotics for conditions for which they are not indicated) and suboptimal antibiotic selection, dosing, and course duration.
Using national outpatient prescribing data, the authors of this review previously estimated that at least 30% of antibiotics prescribed in US physician offices and emergency departments were unnecessary (table 1).36 Total inappropriate antibiotic use, including selection, dosing and duration, is likely much higher. In outpatient settings, acute respiratory infections (ARIs) are major drivers of inappropriate antibiotic use. ARIs accounted for 44% of antibiotics prescribed in US physician offices and emergency departments in 2010–2011 and half of these prescriptions were unnecessary.36
Guideline-concordant antibiotic selection is an important stewardship target as it can improve “drug–bug” match and reduce side effects. In a descriptive study using national prescribing data, Hersh et al. found that among the three most common conditions leading to antibiotic prescriptions in the United States, acute otitis media, sinusitis, and pharyngitis, guideline-recommended first-line antibiotics were prescribed in only 52% (95% confidence interval [CI] 49%−55%) of visits.37 Accounting for drug allergies and treatment failures, the authors estimated at least 80% of visits should be treated with first-line agents.37
Shortening therapy to the minimum effective duration reduces antibiotic exposure and minimizes the risk of resistance and adverse events. Recent editorials have advocated for shorter courses of antibiotic therapy.38–40 Historically, 7-, 10-, or 14-day courses were the norm for many conditions. However, shorter durations of therapy have been shown to be equally effective in several conditions, including community-acquired pneumonia,41–44 pyelonephritis,45 acute chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbations,46 and sinusitis.47 However, long courses are still more effective for acute otitis media in young children.48 High-quality studies defining the minimum effective duration of antibiotic therapy for specific diagnoses and populations are needed. Little evidence exists on duration in actual outpatient prescribing; however, a descriptive study by the authors of this review of over 3.5 million adult sinusitis visits with an antibiotic prescription found that 66.9% (95% CI 61.0–72.8%) of prescriptions were for 10 days, longer than the guideline-recommended 5–7 days of antibiotic therapy for uncomplicated cases.49
Antibiotic prescribing rates in the United States are highest in the South compared with other regions.1750–55 There is also a trend toward higher antibiotic prescription rates in rural, compared with urban, areas.5256 The reasons for these geographic differences are not known. Prescribing also varies by outpatient setting. A descriptive study of a large convenience sample of employer-group health insurance claims (N=156,015,899) found that antibiotic prescribing rates for antibiotic-inappropriate respiratory conditions were highest among urgent care clinics (45.7% of visits) compared with emergency departments (24.6%), physician offices (17.0%), and retail clinics (14.4%).57
Progress has been made in the United States; national antibiotic prescription data shows that outpatient antibiotic prescription rates decreased 4% between 2011 and 2015 — from 877 prescriptions per 1000 population in 2011 to 838 prescriptions per 1000 population in 2015 (fig 2).58 This decline has been driven by reductions in prescribing to children. US antibiotic prescribing rates for children decreased by 13% from 2011–15, while rates among adults remained stable.58 The success in improving pediatric antibiotic prescribing is likely due to many factors, including the introduction of 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine,59 public health efforts to educate parents and health professionals, and clinician efforts to change behavior.
Drivers of inappropriate antibiotic prescribing
Inappropriate antibiotic prescribing is likely multifactorial. Growing evidence shows that reasons for inappropriate prescribing are at least in part psychologically and socially rooted, meaning that antibiotic prescribing is as much a behavior as a scientific decision. Much of this literature is qualitative and based on surveys or interviews with clinicians with some evidence from observational studies.
Clinicians do not perceive that they prescribe inappropriately. In a qualitative study by Dempsey et al. of semi-structured interviews of 13 clinicians about acute bronchitis management, clinicians agreed with guideline recommendations to not use antibiotics and felt that clinicians other than themselves were inappropriately using antibiotics for treatment of bronchitis.60 Without information on and oversight of their antibiotic prescribing patterns, clinicians may not understand their role in inappropriate antibiotic prescribing. In this same study, clinicians cited lack of feedback on and accountability as a barrier to appropriate antibiotic prescribing.60
Knowledge of guideline recommendations of antibiotic indications is the foundation of appropriate antibiotic prescribing. Lack of knowledge could lead some clinicians to prescribe antibiotics inappropriately. However, a qualitative study by Sanchez et al. of 36 clinician interviews found that clinicians are generally familiar with guideline recommendations for common outpatient conditions.61 Gaps availability of guideline recommendations may contribute to variation in antibiotic treatment for some conditions. For example, there are few guidelines on dental infection management.
Additionally, evidence from these clinician interview studies by Dempsey et al. and Sanchez et al. show that clinicians frequently cite fear of complications from infections as a reason for prescribing antibiotics when they are not indicated and for prescribing broader-spectrum agents than indicated.6061 However, for ARIs that commonly lead to unnecessary antibiotic prescribing, infectious complications are rare compared with the frequency of antibiotic-associated ADEs. A cohort study of 3.36 million ARI episodes seen in UK primary care practices found that, overall, the number needed to treat to prevent one case of a serious ARI complication was over 4,000.62 However, as previously discussed, it is estimated that for every 1,000 outpatient antibiotic prescriptions, there is one emergency department visit for an antibiotic-associated ADE.11
The qualitative studies by Dempsey et al. and Sanchez et al. also found that clinicians’ perception that patients want antibiotics drives them to inappropriately prescribe antibiotics.6061 In another qualitative study of clinician attitudes by Szymczak et al., pediatricians reported that they sometimes prescribed antibiotics for social reasons, such as wanting to please parents.63 Direct requests for antibiotics, i.e., when a patient explicitly asks for antibiotics for their illness, are rare. A qualitative study of 42 German visits to primary care clinics by adult patients with acute cough found that only 2 patients (5%) explicitly requested antibiotics while implicit expectations were observed in 7 visits (17%).64 A 2001 mixed-methods study by Mangione-Smith et al. of 295 parents at two pediatric practices found that overt requests for antibiotics occurred in only 1% of visits, yet clinicians perceived expectations for antibiotics in 34% of visits.65 Implied requests for antibiotics are more common, and certain communication behaviors by patients and families can lead clinicians to perceive that antibiotics are desired. Another mixed-methods study of 522 pediatric encounters for cold symptoms found that clinicians were 20.2% (95% CI 6.3–34.0%, p=0.004) more likely to perceive expectations for antibiotics when parents questioned the treatment plan and 9.3% (95% CI 1.8–16.9%, p=0.02) more likely to perceive expectations for antibiotics when parents offered a candidate bacterial diagnosis.66 An example of questioning the treatment plan would be a parent responding to clinician suggestions of symptomatic therapy, “We have already tried that, and it is not helping.” An example of offering a candidate bacterial diagnosis is when a parent says, “I am worried that she might have strep throat.” This study also found that clinicians were 31% (95% CI 16.0–47.3%, p<0.001) more likely to prescribe an antibiotic for a viral diagnosis when they perceived parental expectations for antibiotics.66
Workload and time constraints are also associated with antibiotic prescribing. In the previously discussed clinician interview studies, clinicians reported prescribing antibiotics because they felt they did not have time to explain why antibiotics were unnecessary63 or because they perceived that writing a prescription was faster than communicating non-antibiotic treatment plans.60 Clinicians with high caseloads may be more likely to prescribe antibiotics than those with fewer patients. An observational study of 440 general practitioners in Norway (N=142,900 ARI visits) found that physicians with higher numbers of ARI visits had higher rates of antibiotic prescriptions for ARIs; the odds of prescribing an antibiotic for an ARI among clinicians in the highest visit number quintile were 1.64 (95% CI 1.33–2.03) times higher than among those in the lowest visit number quintile.67 Additionally, clinicians may face decision fatigue that makes prescribing antibiotics the default approach, even when inappropriate. An observational study of 21,867 adult primary care visits demonstrated that antibiotic prescribing for ARIs increased throughout each shift.68 This odds of receiving antibiotics for an ARI in the 4th hour of a clinic session was 26% higher than in the 1st hour (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.26, 95% CI 1.13–1.41).68
Habit also drives antibiotic-prescribing patterns. In their qualitative study, Sanchez et al. found that clinicians report that they often rely on previous experience and familiarity with antibiotic agents.61 Additionally, clinician-level variation in antibiotic prescribing for ARIs is seen in studies that control for patient case-mix and comorbidities. An obsevational study of 1,044,523 ARI visits at US Department of Veterans Affairs outpatient clinics found that 59% of observed variation in antibiotic prescribing was attributable to provider-level variation.53 Similarly, an observational study of almost 400,000 ARI visits to a pediatric primary care network found that antibiotic prescribing varied significantly by practice (p<0.001) and that this relationship could not be explained by clinical factors, such as comorbidities or diagnosis, implying provider-level factors contributed to the observed variability.69
Interventions to improve outpatient antibiotic prescribing
Improving outpatient antibiotic prescribing requires interventions that target the root causes of inappropriate prescribing and modify clinician behavior. Here, we examine the existing literature on several potential interventions, including patient and clinician education, communication training, point-of-care testing, active monitoring and delayed prescribing, clinical decision support, audit and feedback, accountable justification, and public commitment posters (table 3). Although these interventions are examined individually, they could be implemented in combination, potentially to greater effect. A 2012 systematic review and meta-analysis of outpatient stewardship interventions in ARI management found that multi-part interventions were more likely to be effective than those with only one component (aOR 6.5, 95% CI 1.9–22).70 These interventions (or combinations of interventions) can be implemented within a framework provided by CDC’s Core Elements of Outpatient Antibiotic Stewardship (fig 1 and table 2). The Core Elements are commitment, action for policy and practice, tracking and reporting, and education and expertise and are based on much of the evidence discussed here.5
With increasing awareness of the complex factors involved in antibiotic prescribing, the use of behavioral science to inform antibiotic stewardship interventions has grown71 and merits special attention in this review. Behavioral science-informed interventions have been of interest to and supported by public health agencies including CDC,5 Public Health England,72 and the World Health Organization.73
Patient education
Clinicians cite patient demand as a factor in antibiotic prescribing and, as a result, there has been interest in patient education on appropriate antibiotic use. The quality of evidence on targeted patient-facing education is limited with contradictory findings. A 2016 Cochrane systematic review identified two randomized controlled trials (from 2000 and 2009) evaluating written information for patients that included 827 participants.74 Overall, the studies in this Cochrane review found that written information reduced antibiotic prescribing in ARIs compared with usual care (risk ratio [RR] 0.47, 95% CI 0.28–0.78; RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.81–0.86).74 However, two other randomized trials in the UK examining educational leaflets, one a 2×2 factorial trial studying two interventions in 1,581 general practitioners practices and the other a single intervention trial in 870 patients presenting to primary care practices with lower respiratory tract infection, found no significant associations between patient educational materials and decreases in antibiotic use (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 1.01, 95% CI 1.00–1.02; IRR 1.27, 95% CI 0.86–1.87).7576
Mass-media campaigns have been associated with reductions in antibiotic use in observational studies, although evaluating causation is difficult. In an observational study of national reimbursement data (N=453,407,458 records), the French campaign, “Antibiotics are not automatic” was associated with a 27% decline in the population-based antibiotic use rate from 2000–2001 to 2002–2007.77 A media campaign in North East England was associated with a 6% reduction in winter antibiotic prescribing compared with nearby areas with no campaign in an observational study.78 In the United States, CDC leads a national effort, Be Antibiotics Aware: Smart Use, Best Care, to educate patients, caregivers, and clinicians about appropriate antibiotic use (www.cdc.gov/antibiotic-use).79 Additionally, CDC observes US Antibiotic Awareness Week each November,80 which coincides with the World Health Organization’s Antibiotic Awareness Week81 and European Antibiotic Awareness Day,82 as well as other global observances.
Clinician education
Two older systematic reviews have demonstrated that active and intensive clinician educational efforts, such as academic detailing, are more effective than passive education.8384 A more recent quasi-experimental study tested academic detailing versus provider and patient mailings and found a significant change in antibiotic prescribing among clinicians who received the academic detailing (odds ratio [OR] 0.49, 95% CI 0.26–0.89) but no significant change among the mailing group.85 National efforts, such as CDC’s Be Antibiotics Aware79 and TARGET in the United Kingdom,86 provide education and resources on antibiotic use for clinicians.
Communication skills training
Communication skills training for clinicians can improve antibiotic use. These trainings teach clinicians to effectively communicate with patients to understand patient concerns and expectations, provide information on expected disease course and recommended treatment options, and provide a contingency plan if symptoms do not improve.87 A multi-arm, cluster-randomized trial by Little et al. examined training in communication skills and/or C-reactive protein (CRP) testing among primary care clinicians in 246 practices in 6 European countries.87 They found that the risk of antibiotic prescribing for ARIs was significantly lower among those who received communication training (adjusted risk ratio [aRR] 0.68, 95% CI 0.50–0.87) or CRP training (aRR 0.53, 95% CI 0.36–0.74) versus controls.87 The risk of antibiotic prescribing was lowest in the group with both interventions (aRR 0.38, 0.25–0.55).87 A cluster-randomized controlled trial in 20 Dutch primary care practices (N=379) also assessed the effect of CRP and communication training on antibiotic prescribing for ARIs.88 Clinicians in the CRP and communication training groups prescribed fewer antibiotics than control groups (CRP: 31% of visits received antibiotics vs. 53% in no-test group, p=0.02; communication training: 27% of visits received antibiotics vs. 54% in no-training group, p<0.01).88 The group with both CRP testing and communication training prescribed the fewest antibiotics (23% of visits).88 However, 3.5 years after the interventions were removed, clinicians who received communication training still prescribed fewer antibiotics (antibiotics prescribed in 26.3% of ARI visits, 95% CI 20.6–32.0%) than the control group (39.1%, 95% CI 33.1–45.1%, p=0.02), while the CRP group was not different than the control group at follow-up.88 In quantitative and qualitative studies, clinicians who received communication skills training provided positive feedback about the training and reported increased confidence in improving antibiotic prescribing.89–91
Clinicians may perceive that they are improving patient satisfaction by prescribing antibiotics; however, evidence shows that patients may still be satisfied without antibiotics as long as their communication expectations are met. In a descriptive study of surveys of almost 300 patients with sore throat in Belgian primary care practices, patients listed seeking symptomatic relief, information about disease course, and reassurance of disease cause as their top three reasons for visiting a physician, while obtaining an antibiotic was rated as the 11th (of 13) most important reason.92 An observational study of 5,169 acute sinusitis encounters in a large integrated health system found that 79.5% of visits in which an antibiotic was prescribed resulted in a favorable patient satisfaction score compared with 75.4% of visits with no antibiotic prescription.93 This difference was significant (aOR 1.2, 95% CI 1.0–1.6); however the actual difference in the percentage of visits with a favorable score was only 4 percentage points, and the factor with the greatest effect on satisfaction was patient-clinician bonding (aOR 2.0, 95% CI 1.6–2.3).93 An observational study of 1,285 pediatric ARI visits found that receiving an antibiotic prescription was not significantly associated with a high satisfaction score (adjusted risk ratio [aRR] 1.13, 95% CI 0.95–1.34) while communication was: parents who received both a negative treatment recommendation (i.e., noting that antibiotics won’t help the child get better) and a positive treatment recommendation (i.e., providing non-antibiotic strategies to help the child feel better) were more likely to rate the visit highly than patients who received no treatment recommendation (aRR 1.16, 95% CI 1.01–1.34).94 Even among patients and caregivers who expect antibiotics, providing specific types of communication may maintain satisfaction. The previously discussed 2001 mixed-methods study by Mangione-Smith et al. showed that satisfaction scores increased significantly among caregivers who expected an antibiotic and did not receive one when a contingency plan was provided;65 the mean satisfaction score for the no contingency plan group was 59 (95% conflidence limit [CL] 53–65) while the mean score for the contingency plan group was 76 (95% CL 66–86).65
Rapid and point-of-care diagnostic tests
When rapid diagnostic, including point-of-care, tests are available, have good sensitivity and specificity, and are not cost-prohibitive, they can help guide disease diagnosis and management, thereby improving antibiotic prescribing. Most US patients and clinicians are familiar with the rapid antigen detection test for group A Streptococcus, which is recommended in the United States by the Infectious Diseases Society of America to establish a diagnosis of streptococcal pharyngitis prior to prescribing antibiotics.95 There has been recent interest in procalcitonin and CRP testing. Procalcitonin and CRP are biomarkers that, although not highly specific, may indicate increased risk of bacterial infection. A Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis of 26 studies examining procalcitonin testing in ARI management found that the per-visit rates of antibiotic prescriptions in primary care were significantly lower among those who used procalcitonin testing compared with controls, 22.9% vs 63.1% (aOR 0.13, 95% CI 0.09–0.18).96 However, a more recent randomized controlled trial (N=1,656) of procalcitonin testing in adult patients diagnosed with acute lower respiratory tract infection in the emergency department found that there was no significant difference in mean antibiotic exposure days between the procalcitonin intervention group (4.2 days) and the usual-care control group (4.3 days; difference −0.05 day; 95% CI −0.6 to 0.5; p=0.87).97 A Cochrane meta-analysis examining six trials of CRP in ARI management found that there was a reduction in antibiotic use with CRP testing (pooled RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.66–0.92) compared with usual care.98 However, the authors of this meta-analysis note that due to heterogeneity in the studies, these results should be interpreted with caution.98 Although these tests may improve antibiotic prescribing, it is important to note that, as already discussed, communication skills training is as effective as CRP testing at reducing antibiotic prescriptions for ARIs and has sustained benefits that CRP testing does not.8788 Additionally, using testing appropriately, i.e. diagnostic stewardship, is critical. Testing should only be done if the clinical presentation is consistent with bacterial infection and test results will influence management.99
Active monitoring and delayed prescribing
Active monitoring (also called watchful waiting) and delayed prescribing are treatment strategies that engage patients/caregivers to observe illness progression and return (active monitoring) or fill an antibiotic prescription (delayed prescribing) if symptoms do not improve or worsen. These strategies are guideline-recommended in the United States for the management of acute otitis media in children100 and acute sinusitis,101102 and have been shown to reduce unnecessary antibiotic use. Delayed prescribing and active monitoring should not be used in conditions where antibiotics are not indicated or are immediately indicated. A Cochrane meta-analysis of delayed prescribing for ARIs found that delayed prescribing resulted in significantly lower odds of antibiotic use than immediate prescribing based on 7 studies (N = 1,963; OR 0.04, 95% CI 0.03–0.05) with no significant difference in patient satisfaction (6 studies, N = 1,633, OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.39–1.10).103 A 2016 randomized trial in 405 adult ARI visits in 23 Spanish family practice clinics examined the effect of antibiotic prescription strategies on several outcomes, including antibiotic use.104 Antibiotic use was significantly different among groups: 91% of patients who received immediate antibiotic prescriptions used antibiotics, compared with 33% of patients with delayed antibiotic prescriptions, 23% of patients instructed to return to the clinic to pick up a prescription if needed, and 12% of patients not prescribed antibiotics (p<0.001).104 In this trial, there were no differences in patient satisfaction, complications, adverse events, or unscheduled return visits among groups.104 Furthermore, in a mixed-methods study of children with acute otitis media, a majority of parents who utilized pain management and delayed prescribing instead of immediate antibiotic therapy reported that they would be willing to treat future episodes without antibiotics.105
Clinical decision support
Studies examining clinical decision support (CDS), which provides information and decision support at the time of diagnosis or treatment, have shown mixed results. A cluster-randomized trial of 33 primary clinics utilized both printed and electronic CDS for acute bronchitis in otherwise healthy adolescents and adults with 9,808 visits during the baseline and 6,242 visits during the intervention period.106 Antibiotic prescribing for acute bronchitis decreased significantly in printed CDS sites, from 80.0% to 68.3%, and at electronic CDS sites, from 74.0% to 60.7%, but not at control sites (72.5% to 74.3%).106 Prescribing was not significantly different between printed and electronic CDS sites.106 However, notably, the appropriate rate of antibiotic prescribing for acute bronchitis in patients included in this study is zero. Another cluster-randomized trial of a CDS intervention in 27 primary care clinics with 21,961 ARI visits found that the CDS tool was used in as few as 6% of visits in the intervention group and was not effective.107 Additionally, a cluster-randomized trial in 104 family practice facilities in England and Scotland found that about 25% of intervention practices used the CDS tool rarely or not at all.108 CDS design is important in its uptake and effectiveness; a 2015 systematic review of CDS randomized trials found that CDS tools that provided decision support integrated into existing processes were more likely to improve prescribing than systems that required active initiation by the clinician.109 Finally, any achieved benefits may not be sustainable once the intervention is removed. A quasi-experimental study in the US Department of Veterans Affairs health system (N = 1,131 ARI visits) found that a CDS tool for ARI management improved guideline-concordant prescribing; however, after the tool was removed, inappropriate prescribing increased.110
Audit and feedback with peer comparisons
There is strong evidence to support the use of tracking antibiotic prescribing practices and reporting them back to clinicians, called audit and feedback, and this practice is recommended by CDC’s Core Elements.5 The Core Elements also specify that effective audit and feedback interventions include comparisons of clinician prescribing with their peers.5 A cluster-randomized trial in 18 pediatric primary care practices (N=1,291,824 visits) evaluated an intervention in which pediatricians received education and prescribing pattern feedback for themselves, their practice, and their network.111 The intervention was associated with a 12.5% decrease in broad-spectrum prescribing for ARIs, with a statistically significant difference of differences of 6.7% (p=0.01) versus controls.111 Unnecessary prescribing for ARIs was low at baseline and did not change significantly during the intervention for any group (p=0.93).111 However, a follow-up observational study found that when the intervention was removed, antibiotic prescribing patterns returned to pre-intervention levels.112
Behavioral science has been used in two recent audit and feedback studies to increase the effectiveness of the intervention.75113 In the first, a randomized trial, Hallsworth and colleagues sent 3,227 letters with peer comparisons to UK general practitioners. The letter informed physicians that they were prescribing antibiotics at higher rates than 80% of general practitioners in their area, i.e., provided social norm information; was signed by a high-profile figure, England’s Chief Medical Officer, to increase credibility; and gave three specific actions clinicians could take to reduce unnecessary antibiotic prescribing.75 Prescribing rates in the letter intervention group were significantly lower than controls, 126.98 (95% CI 125.68–128.27) antibiotics per 1,000 weighted population versus 131.25 (95% CI 130.22–132.16) (IRR 0.97, 95% CI 0.96–0.98, p<0.001).75 In the second study, a cluster-randomized trial in 47 primary care practices in Boston and Los Angeles, Meeker et al. examined three stewardship interventions designed using behavioral science principles: peer comparison, accountable justification, and suggested alternatives.113 In the peer comparison intervention arm, clinicians with the lowest inappropriate antibiotic prescribing rates for ARIs received an email informing them that they were top performers, reinforcing desired behavior, while all other clinicians received emails informing them that they were “not a top performer.”113 The intervention was designed to drive performance to a goal, instead of to the mean, and therefore did not include an average prescribing comparison. This peer comparison was associated with a significant decrease in inappropriate antibiotic prescribing for ARIs from 19.9% to 3.7% (difference in differences compared to controls, −5.2, 95% CI −6.9% to −1.6%).113 One year after the interventions were discontinued, the peer comparison was the only intervention arm (of three) that had significantly lower prescribing rates than the control group.114
Accountable justification
Accountable justification, in which clinicians must document explanations for non-indicated antibiotic prescriptions, was associated with a reduction in inappropriate antibiotic prescribing in the previously mentioned study by Meeker et al.113 The intervention was designed based on the behavioral science principles that accountability improves decision making and public justification creates social and reputational concerns that improve behavior.113 Clinicians knew that antibiotic justification notes in the medical record would be visible to other clinicians, thus increasing accountability for inappropriate prescribing. The intervention was associated with a significant reduction in prescribing for ARIs from over 23.2% to 5.2% (difference in differences, −7.0%, 95% CI −9.1% to −2.9%; p<0.001).113 In contrast, the suggested alternatives intervention in this study, where the electronic health record suggested non-antibiotic treatments, did not significantly improve prescribing compared with the control group (p=0.66).113
Public commitment posters
Lastly, evidence shows that using public commitment posters, a simple, low-cost intervention, reduces inappropriate antibiotic prescribing. Commitment posters are behavioral nudges for clinicians that are designed to utilize clinicians’ desire to remain consistent with previous public commitments.115 A randomized controlled trial in 954 visits by adults with ARIs in 5 outpatient clinics tested the use of public commitment posters in patient exam rooms.115 The posters included a letter from the clinician committing to use antibiotics appropriately and the clinician’s picture and signature.115 The public commitment poster intervention was associated with an absolute reduction in inappropriate prescribing for ARIs of 19.7% (95% CI 5.8%−33.0%) compared with the control group (p=0.02).115 Commitment posters have been adopted by state health departments, healthcare systems, and CDC.5116
Emerging interventions
A study of clinicaltrials.gov for the terms “antibiotic” and “outpatient” yielded 24 active studies. Three of these 24 studies examine interventions to improve antibiotic prescribing in outpatient settings. The first, a randomized controlled trial in Switzerland is in the enrollment phase and will evaluate a nationwide antibiotic stewardship program that uses routine feedback and clinician and patient education on overall and broad-spectrum antibiotic use and hospitalization rates (NCT03379194). The second is a randomized controlled trial that will examine education and communication skills interventions among clinicians, looking at the outcomes of parental ratings of shared decision-making and satisfaction, inappropriate antibiotic prescribing, re-visits, and adverse drug events (NCT03037112). This trial is currently in the recruitment phase with estimated study completion in June 2019. The third study is recruiting clinicians in France to investigate the effect of regional antibiotic consumption and bacterial resistance data on prescribing practices and antibiotic resistance (NCT02816528); however, information on this study has not been updated since June 2016.
Guidelines
CDC’s Core Elements of Outpatient Stewardship offers guidance for implementation of outpatient antibiotic stewardship.5 Additionally, many guidelines for common outpatient conditions provide specific recommendations on antibiotic prescribing that, if followed, could reduce unnecessary antibiotic prescribing and improve agent selection and therapy duration when antibiotics are indicated. The Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee (HICPAC) has provided recommendations on incorporating antibiotic stewardship principles into treatment guidelines, emphasizing diagnostic testing and infectious disease treatment.117 In addition, the Infectious Diseases Society of America and the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America developed guidelines for the implementation of antibiotic stewardship programs in inpatient settings,118 and some of the strategies in these guidelines may be beneficial in outpatient settings as well.
Conclusion
Approximately 270 million outpatient antibiotics are dispensed in the United States each year and at least 30% of these are unnecessary.436 Antibiotic use is not without risks, including antibiotic resistance and adverse events. Antibiotics should be considered when the clinical benefits outweigh the risks, such as for sepsis or suspected sepsis. Using antibiotics only when needed, and, when needed, using the right agent, dose, and duration at the right time is a matter of patient safety.
In addition to clinical factors, outpatient antibiotic prescribing is also driven by psycho-social factors including lack of self-awareness, fear of complications, perceived patient expectations, and time constraints and fatigue. Many different outpatient antibiotic stewardship interventions have shown some success and using multiple, complementary intervention strategies can reduce inappropriate antibiotic use. The most effective combination of interventions will depend upon the outpatient setting and practice; however, behavioral-science based interventions (public commitment posters, accountable justification, and feedback with peer comparison) and communications training have shown promising results and should be included in any antibiotic stewardship intervention package. The Core Elements of Outpatient Antibiotic Stewardship can facilitate the implementation of stewardship interventions in outpatient settings. Using antibiotics appropriately is an important component of best patient care and should be a cornerstone of effective outpatient practice.
Patient consent: Not applicable.
Conflicts: We have read and understood BMJ policy on declaration of interests and declare that we have no competing interests.
Disclaimer: The findings and conclusions in this manuscript are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
ReferencesWorld Health Organization. WHO Antimicrobial Resistance Global Report on Surveillance: World Health Organization, 2014http://www.who.int/drugresistance/documents/surveillancereport/en/.Public Health England. English surveillance programme for antimicrobial utilisation and resistance (ESPAUR) Report 2014: Public Health England, 2014https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/362374/ESPAUR_Report_2014__3_.pdf.DuffyE, RitchieS, MetcalfeS, Antibacterials dispensed in the community comprise 85%−95% of total human antibacterial consumption. J Clin Pharm Ther2017 doi: 10.1111/jcpt.12610.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Outpatient Antibiotic Prescriptions — United States, 2015. Atlanta, GA: US Department of Health and Human Services, CDC, 2015https://www.cdc.gov/antibiotic-use/community/pdfs/Annual-Report-2015.pdf.SanchezGV, Fleming-DutraKE, RobertsRM, Core Elements of Outpatient Antibiotic Stewardship. MMWR Recomm Rep2016;65(6):1–12. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.rr6506a1.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Antibiotic Resistance Threats in the United States, 2013. Atlanta, GA: US Department of Health and Human Services, CDC, 2013https://www.cdc.gov/drugresistance/pdf/ar-threats-2013-508.pdf.van de Sande-BruinsmaN, GrundmannH, VerlooD, Antimicrobial drug use and resistance in Europe. Emerg Infect Dis2008;14(11):1722–30. doi: 10.3201/eid1411.070467.18976555DingleKE, DidelotX, QuanTP, Effects of control interventions on Clostridium difficile infection in England: an observational study. Lancet Infect Dis2017;17(4):411–21. doi: 10.1016/s1473-3099(16)30514-x.28130063BlaettlerL, MertzD, FreiR, Secular trend and risk factors for antimicrobial resistance in Escherichia coli isolates in Switzerland 1997–2007. Infection2009;37(6):534–9. doi: 10.1007/s15010-009-8457-0.20013094CostelloeC, MetcalfeC, LoveringA, Effect of antibiotic prescribing in primary care on antimicrobial resistance in individual patients: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ2010;340:c2096. doi: 10.1136/bmj.c2096.20483949ShehabN, PatelPR, SrinivasanA, Emergency department visits for antibiotic-associated adverse events. Clin Infect Dis2008;47(6):735–43. doi: 10.1086/591126.18694344LessaFC, MuY, BambergWM, Burden of Clostridium difficile infection in the United States. N Engl J Med2015;372(9):825–34. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1408913.25714160KwonJH, OlsenMA, DubberkeER. The morbidity, mortality, and costs associated with Clostridium difficile infection. Infect Dis Clin North Am2015;29(1):123–34. doi: 10.1016/j.idc.2014.11.003.25677706ChitnisAS, HolzbauerSM, BelflowerRM, Epidemiology of community-associated Clostridium difficile infection, 2009 through 2011. JAMA Intern Med2013;173(14):1359–67. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2013.7056.23780507DantesR, MuY, HicksLA, Association Between Outpatient Antibiotic Prescribing Practices and Community-Associated Clostridium difficile Infection. Open Forum Infect Dis2015;2(3):ofv113. doi: 10.1093/ofid/ofv113.26509182LawesT, Lopez-LozanoJM, NebotCA, Effect of a national 4C antibiotic stewardship intervention on the clinical and molecular epidemiology of Clostridium difficile infections in a region of Scotland: a non-linear time-series analysis. Lancet Infect Dis2017;17(2):194–206. doi: 10.1016/s1473-3099(16)30397-8.27825595HicksLA, BartocesMG, RobertsRM, US outpatient antibiotic prescribing variation according to geography, patient population, and provider specialty in 2011. Clin Infect Dis2015;60(9):1308–16. doi: 10.1093/cid/civ076.25747410SanchezGV, ShapiroDJ, HershAL, Outpatient Macrolide Antibiotic Prescribing in the United States, 2008–2011. Open Forum Infect Dis2017;4(4):ofx220. doi: 10.1093/ofid/ofx220.29255725U.S. Food and Drug Administration. FDA Drug Safety Communication: Azithromycin (Zithromax or Zmax) and the risk of potentially fatal heart rhythms. Silver Spring, MD: US Department of Health and Human Services, FDA, 2013https://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/DrugSafety/UCM343347.pdf.KabbaniS, HershAL, ShapiroDJ, Opportunities to Improve Fluoroquinolone Prescribing in the United States for Adult Ambulatory Care Visits. Clin Infect Dis2018;67(1):134–136. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciy035.29373664U.S. Food and Drug Administration. FDA Drug Safety Communication: FDA updates warnings for oral and injectable fluoroquinolone antibiotics due to disabling side effects. Silver Spring, MD: US Department of Health and Human Services, FDA, 2016https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DrugSafety/ucm511530.htm.HortonDB, ScottFI, HaynesK, Antibiotic Exposure and Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis: A Case-Control Study. Pediatrics2015;136(2):e333–43. doi: 10.1542/peds.2015-0036.26195533MarildK, YeW, LebwohlB, Antibiotic exposure and the development of coeliac disease: a nationwide case-control study. BMC Gastroenterol2013;13:109. doi: 10.1186/1471-230x-13-109.23834758HviidA, SvanstromH, FrischM. Antibiotic use and inflammatory bowel diseases in childhood. Gut2011;60(1):49–54. doi: 10.1136/gut.2010.219683.20966024BoursiB, MamtaniR, HaynesK, The effect of past antibiotic exposure on diabetes risk. Eur J Endocrinol2015;172(6):639–48. doi: 10.1530/eje-14-1163.25805893LoveBL, MannJR, HardinJW, Antibiotic prescription and food allergy in young children. Allergy Asthma Clin Immunol2016;12:41. doi: 10.1186/s13223-016-0148-7.27536320VangayP, WardT, GerberJS, Antibiotics, pediatric dysbiosis, and disease. Cell Host Microbe2015;17(5):553–64. doi: 10.1016/j.chom.2015.04.006.25974298SaariA, VirtaLJ, SankilampiU, Antibiotic exposure in infancy and risk of being overweight in the first 24 months of life. Pediatrics2015;135(4):617–26. doi: 10.1542/peds.2014-3407.25825533SchwartzBS, PollakJ, Bailey-DavisL, Antibiotic use and childhood body mass index trajectory. Int J Obes (Lond)2016;40(4):615–21. doi: 10.1038/ijo.2015.218.26486756ScottFI, HortonDB, MamtaniR, Administration of Antibiotics to Children Before Age 2 Years Increases Risk for Childhood Obesity. Gastroenterology2016;151(1):120–29.e5. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2016.03.006.27003602PoulsenMN, PollakJ, Bailey-DavisL, Associations of prenatal and childhood antibiotic use with child body mass index at age 3 years. Obesity (Silver Spring)2017;25(2):438–44. doi: 10.1002/oby.21719.28124504MurphyR, StewartAW, BraithwaiteI, Antibiotic treatment during infancy and increased body mass index in boys: an international cross-sectional study. Int J Obes (Lond)2014;38(8):1115–9. doi: 10.1038/ijo.2013.218.24257411MillionM, LagierJC, YahavD, Gut bacterial microbiota and obesity. Clin Microbiol Infect2013;19(4):305–13. doi: 10.1111/1469-0691.12172.23452229GerberJS, BryanM, RossRK, Antibiotic Exposure During the First 6 Months of Life and Weight Gain During Childhood. JAMA2016;315(12):1258–65. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.2395.27002447The White House. National Action Plan for Combating Antibiotic-Resistant BacteriaWashington D.C.: The White House, 2015https://www.cdc.gov/drugresistance/pdf/national_action_plan_for_combating_antibotic-resistant_bacteria.pdfFleming-DutraKE, HershAL, ShapiroDJ, Prevalence of Inappropriate Antibiotic Prescriptions Among US Ambulatory Care Visits, 2010–2011. JAMA2016;315(17):1864–73. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.4151.27139059HershAL, Fleming-DutraKE, ShapiroDJ, Frequency of First-line Antibiotic Selection Among US Ambulatory Care Visits for Otitis Media, Sinusitis, and Pharyngitis. JAMA Intern Med2016;176(12):1870–72. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.6625.27775770SpellbergBThe New Antibiotic Mantra-”Shorter Is Better”. JAMA Intern Med2016;176(9):1254–5. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.3646.27455385LlewelynMJ, FitzpatrickJM, DarwinE, The antibiotic course has had its day. BMJ2017;358:j3418. doi: 10.1136/bmj.j3418.28747365TammaPD, CosgroveSE. Duration of antibiotic therapy for community-acquired pneumonia in children. Clin Infect Dis2012;54(6):883–4; author reply 85. doi: 10.1093/cid/cir941.22291108ScaleraNM, FileTMJr.Determining the duration of therapy for patients with community-acquired pneumonia. Curr Infect Dis Rep2013;15(2):191–5. doi: 10.1007/s11908-013-0327-3.23443362UrangaA, EspanaPP, BilbaoA, Duration of Antibiotic Treatment in Community-Acquired Pneumonia: A Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Intern Med2016;176(9):1257–65. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.3633.27455166el MoussaouiR, de BorgieCA, van den BroekP, Effectiveness of discontinuing antibiotic treatment after three days versus eight days in mild to moderate-severe community acquired pneumonia: randomised, double blind study. BMJ2006;332(7554):1355. doi: 10.1136/bmj.332.7554.1355.16763247DunbarLM, WunderinkRG, HabibMP, High-dose, short-course levofloxacin for community-acquired pneumonia: a new treatment paradigm. Clin Infect Dis2003;37(6):752–60. doi: 10.1086/377539.12955634Eliakim-RazN, YahavD, PaulM, Duration of antibiotic treatment for acute pyelonephritis and septic urinary tract infection-- 7 days or less versus longer treatment: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Antimicrob Chemother2013;68(10):2183–91. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkt177.23696620El MoussaouiR, RoedeBM, SpeelmanP, Short-course antibiotic treatment in acute exacerbations of chronic bronchitis and COPD: a meta-analysis of double-blind studies. Thorax2008;63(5):415–22. doi: 10.1136/thx.2007.090613.18234905FalagasME, KarageorgopoulosDE, GrammatikosAP, Effectiveness and safety of short vs. long duration of antibiotic therapy for acute bacterial sinusitis: a meta-analysis of randomized trials. Br J Clin Pharmacol2009;67(2):161–71. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2125.2008.03306.x.19154447HobermanA, ParadiseJL, RocketteHE, Shortened Antimicrobial Treatment for Acute Otitis Media in Young Children. N Engl J Med2016;375(25):2446–56. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1606043.28002709KingLM, SanchezGV, BartocesM, Antibiotic therapy duration for adult sinusitis in the United States, 2016. JAMA Intern Med2018[ePub ahead of print]; doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2018.0407 [published Online First: 2018/03/28].ArizpeA, RevelesKR, AitkenSL. Regional variation in antibiotic prescribing among medicare part D enrollees, 2013. BMC Infect Dis2016;16(1):744. doi: 10.1186/s12879-016-2091-0.27938336RobertsRM, HicksLA, BartocesM. Variation in US outpatient antibiotic prescribing quality measures according to health plan and geography. Am J Manag Care2016;22(8):519–23.27541698BlueCross BlueShield. Antibiotic Prescription Fill Rates Declining in the U.S. BlueCross BlueShield, 2017https://bluehealthintelligence.com/img/hoa/pdf/HoA.Antibiotics.Report.pdf.JonesBE, SauerB, JonesMM, Variation in Outpatient Antibiotic Prescribing for Acute Respiratory Infections in the Veteran Population: A Cross-sectional Study. Ann Intern Med2015;163(2):73–80. doi: 10.7326/m14-1933.26192562BarnettML, LinderJA. Antibiotic prescribing for adults with acute bronchitis in the United States, 1996–2010. JAMA2014;311(19):2020–2. doi: 10.1001/jama.2013.286141.24846041Fleming-DutraKE, DemirjianA, BartocesM, Variations in Antibiotic and Azithromycin Prescribing for Children by Geography and Specialty - United States, 2013. Pediatr Infect Dis J2017;37(1):52–58. doi: 10.1097/inf.0000000000001708.WatsonJR, WangL, KlimaJ, Healthcare Claims Data: An Underutilized Tool for Pediatric Outpatient Antimicrobial Stewardship. Clin Infect Dis2017;64(11):1479–85. doi: 10.1093/cid/cix195.28329388PalmsDL, HicksLA, BartocesM, Comparison of Antibiotic Prescribing in Retail Clinics, Urgent Care Centers, Emergency Departments, and Traditional Ambulatory Care Settings in the United States, 2014JAMA Intern Med[In Press].Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Antibiotic Resistance Patient Safety Atlas2016Accessed11/08/2017https://gis.cdc.gov/grasp/PSA/indexAU.html.YildirimI, SheaKM, PeltonSI. Pneumococcal Disease in the Era of Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine. Infect Dis Clin North Am2015;29(4):679–97. doi: 10.1016/j.idc.2015.07.009.26610421DempseyPP, BusingerAC, WhaleyLE, Primary care clinicians’ perceptions about antibiotic prescribing for acute bronchitis: a qualitative study. BMC Fam Pract2014;15:194. doi: 10.1186/s12875-014-0194-5.25495918SanchezGV, RobertsRM, AlbertAP, Effects of knowledge, attitudes, and practices of primary care providers on antibiotic selection, United States. Emerg Infect Dis2014;20(12):2041–7. doi: 10.3201/eid2012.140331.25418868PetersenI, JohnsonAM, IslamA, Protective effect of antibiotics against serious complications of common respiratory tract infections: retrospective cohort study with the UK General Practice Research Database. BMJ2007;335(7627):982–82. doi: 10.1136/bmj.39345.405243.BE.17947744SzymczakJE, FeemsterKA, ZaoutisTE, Pediatrician perceptions of an outpatient antimicrobial stewardship intervention. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol2014;35Suppl 3:S69–78. doi: 10.1086/677826.25222901AltinerA, KnaufA, MoebesJ, Acute cough: a qualitative analysis of how GPs manage the consultation when patients explicitly or implicitly expect antibiotic prescriptions. Fam Pract2004;21(5):500–6. doi: 10.1093/fampra/cmh505.15367471Mangione-SmithR, McGlynnEA, ElliottMN, Parent expectations for antibiotics, physician-parent communication, and satisfaction. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med2001;155(7):800–6.11434847Mangione-SmithR, ElliottMN, StiversT, Ruling out the need for antibiotics: are we sending the right message?Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med2006;160(9):945–52. doi: 10.1001/archpedi.160.9.945.16953018GjelstadS, StraandJ, DalenI, Do general practitioners’ consultation rates influence their prescribing patterns of antibiotics for acute respiratory tract infections?J Antimicrob Chemother2011;66(10):2425–33. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkr295.21784782LinderJA, DoctorJN, FriedbergMW, Time of day and the decision to prescribe antibiotics. JAMA Intern Med2014;174(12):2029–31. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.5225.25286067GerberJS, PrasadPA, Russell LocalioA, Variation in Antibiotic Prescribing Across a Pediatric Primary Care Network. Journal of the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society2015;4(4):297–304.26582868van der VeldenAW, PijpersEJ, KuyvenhovenMM, Effectiveness of physician-targeted interventions to improve antibiotic use for respiratory tract infections. Br J Gen Pract2012;62(605):e801–7. doi: 10.3399/bjgp12X659268.23211259Tonkin-CrineS, WalkerAS, ButlerCC. Contribution of behavioural science to antibiotic stewardship. BMJ2015;350:h3413. doi: 10.1136/bmj.h3413.26111947PinderR, SallisA, BerryD, Behaviour change and antibiotic prescribing in healthcare settings: Literature review and behavioural analysis. London: Public Health England, Department of Public Health, 2015https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/405031/Behaviour_Change_for_Antibiotic_Prescribing_-_FINAL.pdf.World Health Organization. Antimicrobial Resistance Behavior Change: First informal technical consultation. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2017http://www.who.int/antimicrobial-resistance/AMR-Behaviour-Change-Consultation-Report_6-and-7-Nov-2017.pdf?ua=1.O’SullivanJW, HarveyRT, GlasziouPP, Written information for patients (or parents of child patients) to reduce the use of antibiotics for acute upper respiratory tract infections in primary care. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2016;11:CD011360. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011360.pub2.27886368HallsworthM, ChadbornT, SallisA, Provision of social norm feedback to high prescribers of antibiotics in general practice: a pragmatic national randomised controlled trial. Lancet2016;387(10029):1743–52. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(16)00215-4.26898856MooreM, LittleP, RumsbyK, Effect of antibiotic prescribing strategies and an information leaflet on longer-term reconsultation for acute lower respiratory tract infection. Br J Gen Pract2009;59(567):728–34. doi: 10.3399/bjgp09X472601.19843421SabuncuE, DavidJ, Bernede-BauduinC, Significant reduction of antibiotic use in the community after a nationwide campaign in France, 2002–2007. PLoS Med2009;6(6):e1000084. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000084.19492093LambertMF, MastersGA, BrentSL. Can mass media campaigns change antimicrobial prescribing? A regional evaluation study. J Antimicrob Chemother2007;59(3):537–43. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkl511.17283035Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Antibiotic Prescribing and Use. Updated January 17, 2018.https://www.cdc.gov/antibiotic-use/.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. U.S. Antibiotic Awareness Week2017Updated October 4, 2017.https://www.cdc.gov/antibiotic-use/week/overview.html.World Health Organization. World Antibiotic Awareness Week2017Updated 2017.http://www.who.int/campaigns/world-antibiotic-awareness-week/2017/event/en/.European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. European Antibiotic Awareness Day. 2018https://antibiotic.ecdc.europa.eu/en.RanjiSR, SteinmanMA, ShojaniaKG, Interventions to reduce unnecessary antibiotic prescribing: a systematic review and quantitative analysis. Med Care2008;46(8):847–62. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e318178eabd.18665065ArnoldSR, StrausSE. Interventions to improve antibiotic prescribing practices in ambulatory care. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2005(4):CD003539. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003539.pub2.16235325VinnardC, LinkinDR, LocalioAR, Effectiveness of interventions in reducing antibiotic use for upper respiratory infections in ambulatory care practices. Popul Health Manag2013;16(1):22–7. doi: 10.1089/pop.2012.0025.23113630Royal College of General Practitioners. TARGET Antibiotic Toolkit2018http://www.rcgp.org.uk/clinical-and-research/resources/toolkits/target-antibiotic-toolkit.aspx.LittleP, StuartB, FrancisN, Effects of internet-based training on antibiotic prescribing rates for acute respiratory-tract infections: a multinational, cluster, randomised, factorial, controlled trial. Lancet2013;382(9899):1175–82. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(13)60994-0.23915885CalsJW, de BockL, BeckersPJ, Enhanced communication skills and C-reactive protein point-of-care testing for respiratory tract infection: 3.5-year follow-up of a cluster randomized trial. Ann Fam Med2013;11(2):157–64. doi: 10.1370/afm.1477.23508603YardleyL, DouglasE, AnthierensS, Evaluation of a web-based intervention to reduce antibiotic prescribing for LRTI in six European countries: quantitative process analysis of the GRACE/INTRO randomised controlled trial. Implement Sci2013;8:134. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-8-134.24238118BekkersMJ, SimpsonSA, DunstanF, Enhancing the quality of antibiotic prescribing in primary care: qualitative evaluation of a blended learning intervention. BMC Fam Pract2010;11:34. doi: 10.1186/1471-2296-11-34.20459655DeckxL, AnthierensS, MaginPJ, Focus on early-career GPs: qualitative evaluation of a multi-faceted educational intervention to improve antibiotic prescribing. Fam Pract2017;35(1):99–104. doi: 10.1093/fampra/cmx074.van DrielML, De SutterA, DeveugeleM, Are sore throat patients who hope for antibiotics actually asking for pain relief?Ann Fam Med2006;4(6):494–9. doi: 10.1370/afm.609.17148626SharpAL, ShenE, KanterMH, Low-value antibiotic prescribing and clinical factors influencing patient satisfaction. Am J Manag Care2017;23(10):589–94.29087630Mangione-SmithR, ZhouC, RobinsonJD, Communication practices and antibiotic use for acute respiratory tract infections in children. Ann Fam Med2015;13(3):221–7. doi: 10.1370/afm.1785.25964399ShulmanST, BisnoAL, CleggHW, Clinical practice guideline for the diagnosis and management of group A streptococcal pharyngitis: 2012 update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis2012;55(10):e86–102. doi: 10.1093/cid/cis629.22965026SchuetzP, WirzY, SagerR, Procalcitonin to initiate or discontinue antibiotics in acute respiratory tract infections. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2017;10:CD007498. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007498.pub3.29025194HuangDT, YealyDM, FilbinMR, Procalcitonin-Guided Use of Antibiotics for Lower Respiratory Tract Infection. N Engl J Med2018[ePub ahead of print]. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1802670 [published Online First: 2018/05/22].AabenhusR, JensenJ-US, JørgensenKJ, Biomarkers as point-of-care tests to guide prescription of antibiotics in patients with acute respiratory infections in primary care. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2014;11:CD010130. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010130.pub2.MorganDJ, MalaniP, DiekemaDJ. Diagnostic stewardship—leveraging the laboratory to improve antimicrobial use. JAMA2017;318(7):607–608. doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.8531.28759678LieberthalAS, CarrollAE, ChonmaitreeT, The diagnosis and management of acute otitis media. Pediatrics2013;131(3):e964–99. doi: 10.1542/peds.2012-3488.23439909RosenfeldRM, PiccirilloJF, ChandrasekharSS, Clinical practice guideline (update): adult sinusitis. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg2015;152(2 Suppl):S1–s39. doi: 10.1177/0194599815572097.WaldER, ApplegateKE, BordleyC, Clinical practice guideline for the diagnosis and management of acute bacterial sinusitis in children aged 1 to 18 years. Pediatrics2013;132(1):e262–80. doi: 10.1542/peds.2013-1071.23796742SpurlingGK, Del MarCB, DooleyL, Delayed antibiotic prescriptions for respiratory infections. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2017;9:CD004417. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004417.pub5.28881007de la Poza AbadM, Mas DalmauG, Moreno BakedanoM, Prescription Strategies in Acute Uncomplicated Respiratory Infections: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Intern Med2016;176(1):21–9. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2015.7088.26719947SiegelRM, KielyM, BienJP, Treatment of otitis media with observation and a safety-net antibiotic prescription. Pediatrics2003;112(3 Pt 1):527–31.12949278GonzalesR, AndererT, McCullochCE, A cluster randomized trial of decision support strategies for reducing antibiotic use in acute bronchitis. JAMA Intern Med2013;173(4):267–73. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2013.1589.23319069LinderJA, SchnipperJL, TsurikovaR, Documentation-based clinical decision support to improve antibiotic prescribing for acute respiratory infections in primary care: a cluster randomised controlled trial. Inform Prim Care2009;17(4):231–40.20359401GullifordMC, van StaaT, DreganA, Electronic health records for intervention research: a cluster randomized trial to reduce antibiotic prescribing in primary care (eCRT study). Ann Fam Med2014;12(4):344–51. doi: 10.1370/afm.1659.25024243HolstiegeJ, MathesT, PieperD. Effects of computer-aided clinical decision support systems in improving antibiotic prescribing by primary care providers: a systematic review. J Am Med Inform Assoc2015;22(1):236–42. doi: 10.1136/amiajnl-2014-002886.25125688GiffordJ, VaethE, RichardsK, Decision support during electronic prescription to stem antibiotic overuse for acute respiratory infections: a long-term, quasi-experimental study. BMC infectious diseases2017;17(1):528. doi: 10.1186/s12879-017-2602-7.28760143GerberJS, PrasadPA, FiksAG, Effect of an outpatient antimicrobial stewardship intervention on broad-spectrum antibiotic prescribing by primary care pediatricians: a randomized trial. JAMA2013;309(22):2345–52. doi: 10.1001/jama.2013.6287.23757082GerberJS, PrasadPA, FiksAG, Durability of benefits of an outpatient antimicrobial stewardship intervention after discontinuation of audit and feedback. JAMA2014;312(23):2569–70. doi: 10.1001/jama.2014.14042.25317759MeekerD, LinderJA, FoxCR, Effect of Behavioral Interventions on Inappropriate Antibiotic Prescribing Among Primary Care Practices: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA2016;315(6):562–70. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.0275.26864410LinderJA, MeekerD, FoxCR, Effects of behavioral interventions on inappropriate antibiotic prescribing in primary care 12 months after stopping interventions. JAMA2017;318(14):1391–92. doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.11152.29049577MeekerD, KnightTK, FriedbergMW, Nudging guideline-concordant antibiotic prescribing: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Intern Med2014;174(3):425–31. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2013.14191.24474434Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. A Commitment to Our Patients About Antibiotics. Updated November 7, 2017.https://www.cdc.gov/antibiotic-use/community/downloads/A-Commitment-to-Our-Patients-about-Antibiotics-poster-version-1.pdf.Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee. Antibiotic Stewardship Statement for Antibiotic Guidelines - The Recommendations of the Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee (HICPAC), 2016https://www.cdc.gov/hicpac/pdf/Antibiotic-Stewardship-Statement.pdf.BarlamTF, CosgroveSE, AbboLM, Implementing an Antibiotic Stewardship Program: Guidelines by the Infectious Diseases Society of America and the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America. Clin Infect Dis2016;62(10):e51–77. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciw118.27080992Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2017 Antibiotic Use in the United States: Progress and Opportunities. Atlanta, GA: US Department of Health and Human Services, CDC, 2017https://www.cdc.gov/antibiotic-use/stewardship-report/pdf/stewardship-report.pdf.
US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Core Elements of Outpatient Antibiotic Stewardship5
Outpatient antibiotic prescriptions in the United States by age group, 2011–2015
Percent of antibiotic prescriptions that were unnecessary, United States, 2010–2011
Age group
All conditions
Acute respiratory conditions
0–19 years
29%
34%
20–64 years
35%
70%
≥65 years
18%
54%
All ages
30%
50%
As presented in the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s 2017 Antibiotic Use in the United States: Progress and Opportunities Report,119 original data from Fleming-Dutra et al., 2016.36
Relationship between the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Core Elements of Outpatient Antibiotic Stewardship and examined interventions
CDC Core Element of Outpatient Antibiotic Stewardship
Related Interventions
Commitment
Public Commitment Posters
Action for Policy and Practice
Diagnostics and Point of Care Testing, Accountable Justification, Active Monitoring /Delayed Prescribing, Clinical Decision Support, Communication Skills Training
Tracking and Reporting
Audit and Feedback, Peer Comparison
Education and Expertise
Communication Skills Training, Clinician Education, Patient Education
Summary of outpatient antibiotic stewardship interventions and considerations
Intervention
Considerations
Patient Education
Effectiveness of smaller-scale interventions uncertain
Mass-media campaigns may be effective
Clinician Education
Active, in-person education more effective than passive education
Factors influencing prescribing go beyond knowledge gaps, so should be provided in combination with other interventions
Communication Skills Training
Effective with sustained benefits over time
May improve patient satisfaction
Effective elements of communication in conditions where antibiotics are not needed include:
Using both a negative and positive treatment recommendation
Providing a contingency plan
Diagnostics and Point of Care Testing
Can be useful in diagnosing bacterial etiologies
Accurate diagnosis decreases inappropriate antibiotic use for viral infections
Diagnostic stewardship is needed in any intervention where diagnostics or point of care testing are used
Active Monitoring/Delayed Prescribing
Can reduce antibiotic use for conditions where antibiotics are sometimes indicated
Guideline recommended for some conditions (acute otitis media in children and acute sinusitis)
Should never be used in conditions where antibiotics are not indicated or are immediately indicated
Clinical Decision Support
Evidence on effectiveness is mixed
Can range from low-tech (such as printed clinical pathways) to high-tech (integrated into EHR)
Low uptake can be a barrier to effectiveness
More effective if integrated into existing systems and easy to use
Audit and Feedback + Peer Comparison
Peer comparison rooted in behavioral science
Effective in reducing inappropriate prescribing
Should provide an appropriate prescribing target (not mean) to prevent regression to the mean effect
Accountable Justification
Based in behavioral science
Effective in reducing inappropriate prescribing
Must be integrated into EHR
Public Commitment Posters
Based in behavioral science
Low-cost, effective intervention
Intended effect is for clinician rather than patient
Should be placed in exam room (not waiting room)
Templates available from CDC and some state health departments
A full discussion of these interventions and supporting evidence is available in the “Interventions to improve outpatient antibiotic prescribing” section of the text.
Questions for future research (box)
What is the effect of outpatient antibiotic stewardship interventions on adverse events?
What is the effect of outpatient antibiotic stewardship interventions on antibiotic resistance?
What is the return on investment of outpatient antibiotic stewardship interventions?
What antibiotic stewardship interventions work to improve agent selection, dose, and duration in conditions where antibiotics are indicated?
Is there a correlation between inappropriate antibiotic prescribing and inappropriate prescribing of other medications, such as opioids?
Do pay-for-performance or other financial incentives, similar to the Quality Premium program in the UK, improve antibiotic prescribing in US outpatient practices?