OBJECTIVES: To explore current practices and decision making regarding antimicrobial prescribing among emergency department (ED) clinical providers. METHODS: We conducted a survey of ED providers recruited from 8 sites in 3 cities. Using purposeful sampling, we then recruited 21 providers for in-depth interviews. Additionally, we observed 10 patient-provider interactions at one of the ED sites. SAS 9.3 was used for descriptive and predictive statistics. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using a thematic, constructivist approach with consensus coding using NVivo 10.0. Field and interview notes collected during the observational study were aligned with themes identified through individual interviews. RESULTS: Of 150 survey respondents, 76% agreed or strongly agreed that antibiotics are overused in the ED, while half believed they personally did not overprescribe. Eighty-nine percent used a smartphone or tablet in the ED for antibiotic prescribing decisions. Several significant differences were found between attending and resident physicians. Interview analysis identified 42 codes aggregated into the following themes: (1) resource and environmental factors that affect care; (2) access to and quality of care received outside of the ED consult; (3) patient-provider relationships; (4) clinical inertia; and (5) local knowledge generation. The observational study revealed limited patient understanding of antibiotic use. Providers relied heavily upon diagnostics and provided limited education to patients. Most patients denied a priori expectations of being prescribed antibiotics. CONCLUSIONS: Patient, provider, and healthcare system factors should be considered when designing interventions to improve antimicrobial stewardship in the ED setting.
OBJECTIVES: To explore current practices and decision making regarding antimicrobial prescribing among emergency department (ED) clinical providers. METHODS: We conducted a survey of ED providers recruited from 8 sites in 3 cities. Using purposeful sampling, we then recruited 21 providers for in-depth interviews. Additionally, we observed 10 patient-provider interactions at one of the ED sites. SAS 9.3 was used for descriptive and predictive statistics. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using a thematic, constructivist approach with consensus coding using NVivo 10.0. Field and interview notes collected during the observational study were aligned with themes identified through individual interviews. RESULTS: Of 150 survey respondents, 76% agreed or strongly agreed that antibiotics are overused in the ED, while half believed they personally did not overprescribe. Eighty-nine percent used a smartphone or tablet in the ED for antibiotic prescribing decisions. Several significant differences were found between attending and resident physicians. Interview analysis identified 42 codes aggregated into the following themes: (1) resource and environmental factors that affect care; (2) access to and quality of care received outside of the ED consult; (3) patient-provider relationships; (4) clinical inertia; and (5) local knowledge generation. The observational study revealed limited patient understanding of antibiotic use. Providers relied heavily upon diagnostics and provided limited education to patients. Most patients denied a priori expectations of being prescribed antibiotics. CONCLUSIONS:Patient, provider, and healthcare system factors should be considered when designing interventions to improve antimicrobial stewardship in the ED setting.
Authors: D M Shlaes; D N Gerding; J F John; W A Craig; D L Bornstein; R A Duncan; M R Eckman; W E Farrer; W H Greene; V Lorian; S Levy; J E McGowan; S M Paul; J Ruskin; F C Tenover; C Watanakunakorn Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 1997-09 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Matthew H Samore; Claude Tonnerre; Elizabeth Lyon Hannah; Gregory J Stoddard; Robert J Borotkanics; Bassam Haddadin; Stephan Harbarth Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2010-11-29 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: Michael L Grover; Jesse D Bracamonte; Anup K Kanodia; Michael J Bryan; Sean P Donahue; Anne-Marie Warner; Frederick D Edwards; Amy L Weaver Journal: Mayo Clin Proc Date: 2007-02 Impact factor: 7.616
Authors: Eili Y Klein; Elena M Martinez; Larissa May; Mustapha Saheed; Valerie Reyna; David A Broniatowski Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2017-06-20 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: David A Broniatowski; Eili Y Klein; Larissa May; Elena M Martinez; Chelsea Ware; Valerie F Reyna Journal: Med Decis Making Date: 2018-07 Impact factor: 2.583
Authors: Mustafa Ozkaynak; Noel Metcalf; Daniel M Cohen; Larissa S May; Peter S Dayan; Rakesh D Mistry Journal: Appl Clin Inform Date: 2020-09-09 Impact factor: 2.342
Authors: Kabir Yadav; Daniella Meeker; Rakesh D Mistry; Jason N Doctor; Katherine E Fleming-Dutra; Ross J Fleischman; Samuel D Gaona; Aubyn Stahmer; Larissa May Journal: Acad Emerg Med Date: 2019-06-19 Impact factor: 3.451
Authors: Larissa S May; Richard E Rothman; Loren G Miller; Gillian Brooks; Mark Zocchi; Catherine Zatorski; Andrea F Dugas; Chelsea E Ware; Jeanne A Jordan Journal: Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol Date: 2015-08-26 Impact factor: 3.254
Authors: Daniel J Livorsi; Rajeshwari Nair; Andrew Dysangco; Andrea Aylward; Bruce Alexander; Matthew W Smith; Sammantha Kouba; Eli N Perencevich Journal: Open Forum Infect Dis Date: 2021-04-14 Impact factor: 4.423
Authors: Gosha Wojcik; Nicola Ring; Corrienne McCulloch; Diane S Willis; Brian Williams; Kalliopi Kydonaki Journal: Arch Public Health Date: 2021-07-23