Llor Carl, Monedero María José, García Guillermo, Arranz Javier, Cots Josep Maria, Bjerrum Lars
Institute of Primary Care and Public Health, School of Medicine, Cardiff University , Cardiff , UK.
Eur J Gen Pract. 2015 Mar;21(1):12-8. doi: 10.3109/13814788.2014.933205. Epub 2014 Aug 12.
Many interventions aimed at improving the quality of antibiotic prescribing have been investigated, but more knowledge is needed regarding the impact of different intensity interventions.
To compare the effect of two interventions, a basic intervention (BI) and intensive intervention (II), aimed to improve the adherence to recommendations on first-line antibiotics in patients with respiratory tract infections (RTIs).
General practitioners (GPs) from different regions of Spain were offered two different interventions on antibiotic prescribing. They registered all patients with RTIs during 15 days before (2008) and after (2009) the intervention. GPs in Catalonia were exposed to BI including prescriber feedback, clinical guidelines and training sessions focused on appropriate antibiotic prescribing. The other group of GPs was exposed to an II, which besides BI, also included training and access to point-of-care tests in practice.
The GPs registered 15 073 RTIs before the intervention and 12 760 RTIs after. The antibiotic prescribing rate reduced from 27.7% to 19.8%. Prescribing of first-choice antibiotics increased after the intervention in both groups. In the group of GPs following the BI, first-line antibiotics accounted for 23.8% of antibiotics before the intervention and 29.4% after (increase 5.6%, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.2-10%), while in the group of GPs following the II these figures were 26.2% and 48.6% (increase 22.4%, 95% CI: 18.8-26%), respectively.
Multifaceted interventions targeting GPs can improve adherence to recommendations for first-line antibiotic prescribing in patients with RTI, with intensive interventions that include point-of-care testing being more effective.
许多旨在提高抗生素处方质量的干预措施已得到研究,但对于不同强度干预措施的影响,仍需更多了解。
比较两种干预措施,即基础干预(BI)和强化干预(II),对改善呼吸道感染(RTI)患者一线抗生素推荐用药依从性的效果。
为西班牙不同地区的全科医生(GP)提供两种不同的抗生素处方干预措施。他们记录了干预前(2008年)和干预后(2009年)15天内所有RTI患者的情况。加泰罗尼亚的全科医生接受基础干预,包括处方者反馈、临床指南以及针对合理使用抗生素的培训课程。另一组全科医生接受强化干预,除基础干预外,还包括培训以及在实践中使用即时检验。
全科医生在干预前记录了15073例RTI患者,干预后记录了12760例。抗生素处方率从27.7%降至19.8%。两组干预后首选抗生素的处方量均有所增加。接受基础干预的全科医生组中,一线抗生素在干预前占抗生素总量的23.8%,干预后占29.4%(增加5.6%,95%置信区间(CI):1.2 - 10%),而接受强化干预的全科医生组中,这两个数字分别为26.2%和48.6%(增加22.4%,95%CI:18.8 - 26%)。
针对全科医生的多方面干预措施可提高RTI患者一线抗生素处方推荐的依从性,其中包括即时检验的强化干预更为有效。