Eili Y Klein1,2,3, Elena M Martinez4, Larissa May5, Mustapha Saheed6, Valerie Reyna7, David A Broniatowski8. 1. Department of Emergency Medicine, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, 5801 Smith Avenue, Suite 3220, Office 265, Davis Building, Baltimore, MD, 21209, USA. eklein@jhu.edu. 2. Center for Disease Dynamics, Economics & Policy, Washington, DC, USA. eklein@jhu.edu. 3. Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA. eklein@jhu.edu. 4. Center for Disease Dynamics, Economics & Policy, Washington, DC, USA. 5. Department of Emergency Medicine, University of California, Davis, Sacramento, CA, USA. 6. Department of Emergency Medicine, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, 5801 Smith Avenue, Suite 3220, Office 265, Davis Building, Baltimore, MD, 21209, USA. 7. Human Neuroscience Institute, Center for Behavioral Economics and Decision Research and Human Neuroscience Institute, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA. 8. Department of Engineering Management and Systems Engineering, The George Washington University, Washington, DC, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Adherence to evidence-based antibiotic therapy guidelines for treatment of upper respiratory tract infections (URIs) varies widely among clinicians. Understanding this variability is key for reducing inappropriate prescribing. OBJECTIVE: To measure how emergency department (ED) clinicians' perceptions of antibiotic prescribing risks affect their decision-making. DESIGN: Clinician survey based on fuzzy-trace theory, a theory of medical decision-making, combined with retrospective data on prescribing outcomes for URI/pneumonia visits in two EDs. The survey predicts the categorical meanings, or gists, that individuals derive from given information. PARTICIPANTS: ED physicians, residents, and physician assistants (PAs) who completed surveys and treated patients with URI/pneumonia diagnoses between August 2014 and December 2015. MAIN MEASURES: Gists derived from survey responses and their association with rates of antibiotic prescribing per visit. KEY RESULTS: Of 4474 URI/pneumonia visits, 2874 (64.2%) had an antibiotic prescription. However, prescribing rates varied from 7% to 91% for the 69 clinicians surveyed (65.2% response rate). Clinicians who framed therapy-prescribing decisions as a categorical choice between continued illness and possibly beneficial treatment ("why not take a risk?" gist, which assumes antibiotic therapy is essentially harmless) had higher rates of prescribing (OR 1.28 [95% CI, 1.06-1.54]). Greater agreement with the "antibiotics may be harmful" gist was associated with lower prescribing rates (OR 0.81 [95% CI, 0.67-0.98]). CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that clinicians who perceive prescribing as a categorical choice between patients remaining ill or possibly improving from therapy are more likely to prescribe antibiotics. However, this strategy assumes that antibiotics are essentially harmless. Clinicians who framed decision-making as a choice between potential harms from therapy and continued patient illness (e.g., increased appreciation of potential harms) had lower prescribing rates. These results suggest that interventions to reduce inappropriate prescribing should emphasize the non-negligible possibility of serious side effects.
BACKGROUND: Adherence to evidence-based antibiotic therapy guidelines for treatment of upper respiratory tract infections (URIs) varies widely among clinicians. Understanding this variability is key for reducing inappropriate prescribing. OBJECTIVE: To measure how emergency department (ED) clinicians' perceptions of antibiotic prescribing risks affect their decision-making. DESIGN: Clinician survey based on fuzzy-trace theory, a theory of medical decision-making, combined with retrospective data on prescribing outcomes for URI/pneumonia visits in two EDs. The survey predicts the categorical meanings, or gists, that individuals derive from given information. PARTICIPANTS: ED physicians, residents, and physician assistants (PAs) who completed surveys and treated patients with URI/pneumonia diagnoses between August 2014 and December 2015. MAIN MEASURES: Gists derived from survey responses and their association with rates of antibiotic prescribing per visit. KEY RESULTS: Of 4474 URI/pneumonia visits, 2874 (64.2%) had an antibiotic prescription. However, prescribing rates varied from 7% to 91% for the 69 clinicians surveyed (65.2% response rate). Clinicians who framed therapy-prescribing decisions as a categorical choice between continued illness and possibly beneficial treatment ("why not take a risk?" gist, which assumes antibiotic therapy is essentially harmless) had higher rates of prescribing (OR 1.28 [95% CI, 1.06-1.54]). Greater agreement with the "antibiotics may be harmful" gist was associated with lower prescribing rates (OR 0.81 [95% CI, 0.67-0.98]). CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that clinicians who perceive prescribing as a categorical choice between patients remaining ill or possibly improving from therapy are more likely to prescribe antibiotics. However, this strategy assumes that antibiotics are essentially harmless. Clinicians who framed decision-making as a choice between potential harms from therapy and continued patient illness (e.g., increased appreciation of potential harms) had lower prescribing rates. These results suggest that interventions to reduce inappropriate prescribing should emphasize the non-negligible possibility of serious side effects.
Entities:
Keywords:
antibiotic resistance; drivers of decision-making; fuzzy-trace theory; gist of antibiotic therapy; non-negligible risks of unnecessary antibiotics
Authors: Rosario Menéndez; Antoni Torres; Rafael Zalacaín; Javier Aspa; Juan J Martín-Villasclaras; Luis Borderías; José M Benítez-Moya; Juan Ruiz-Manzano; Felipe Rodríguez de Castro; José Blanquer; Diego Pérez; Carmen Puzo; Fernando Sánchez-Gascón; José Gallardo; Carlos Alvarez; Luis Molinos Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2005-06-03 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: J A Finkelstein; R L Davis; S F Dowell; J P Metlay; S B Soumerai; S L Rifas-Shiman; M Higham; Z Miller; I Miroshnik; A Pedan; R Platt Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2001-07 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Andrea Freyer Dugas; Thomas D Kirsch; Matthew Toerper; Fred Korley; Gayane Yenokyan; Daniel France; David Hager; Scott Levin Journal: J Emerg Med Date: 2016-04-25 Impact factor: 1.484
Authors: Katherine E Fleming-Dutra; Adam L Hersh; Daniel J Shapiro; Monina Bartoces; Eva A Enns; Thomas M File; Jonathan A Finkelstein; Jeffrey S Gerber; David Y Hyun; Jeffrey A Linder; Ruth Lynfield; David J Margolis; Larissa S May; Daniel Merenstein; Joshua P Metlay; Jason G Newland; Jay F Piccirillo; Rebecca M Roberts; Guillermo V Sanchez; Katie J Suda; Ann Thomas; Teri Moser Woo; Rachel M Zetts; Lauri A Hicks Journal: JAMA Date: 2016-05-03 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Daniella Meeker; Tara K Knight; Mark W Friedberg; Jeffrey A Linder; Noah J Goldstein; Craig R Fox; Alan Rothfeld; Guillermo Diaz; Jason N Doctor Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2014-03 Impact factor: 21.873
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: Aditi Patel; Elizabeth R Pfoh; Anita D Misra Hebert; Alexander Chaitoff; Aryeh Shapiro; Niyati Gupta; Michael B Rothberg Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2019-10-19 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Andrew I Geller; Maribeth C Lovegrove; Nadine Shehab; Lauri A Hicks; Mathew R P Sapiano; Daniel S Budnitz Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2018-04-20 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Amer F Alsoudi; Lauren Ton; Davin C Ashraf; Oluwatobi O Idowu; Alan W Kong; Linyan Wang; Robert C Kersten; Bryan J Winn; Seanna R Grob; M Reza Vagefi Journal: Eye Contact Lens Date: 2022-04-01 Impact factor: 2.018