Timo Smieszek1,2, Koen B Pouwels1,2,3, F Christiaan K Dolk1,3, David R M Smith1, Susan Hopkins4,5, Mike Sharland6, Alastair D Hay7, Michael V Moore8, Julie V Robotham1. 1. Modelling and Economics Unit, National Infection Service, Public Health England, London, UK. 2. MRC Centre for Outbreak Analysis and Modelling, Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Imperial College School of Public Health, London, UK. 3. PharmacoTherapy, -Epidemiology & -Economics, Department of Pharmacy, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands. 4. Antimicrobial Resistance and Stewardship and Healthcare-Associated Infections Programme, Public Health England, London, UK. 5. Directorate of Infection, Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK. 6. Paediatric Infectious Diseases Research Group, St George's University of London, London, UK. 7. Centre for Academic Primary Care, NIHR School for Primary Care Research, Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, UK. 8. Academic Unit for Primary Care and Population Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Abstract
Objectives: To identify and quantify inappropriate systemic antibiotic prescribing in primary care in England, and ultimately to determine the potential for reduction in prescribing of antibiotics. Methods: Primary care data from 2013-15 recorded in The Health Improvement Network (THIN) database were used. Potentially inappropriate prescribing events in the database were identified by: (i) comparing prescribing events against treatment guidelines; (ii) comparing actual proportions of consultations resulting in prescription for a set of conditions with the ideal proportions derived from expert opinion; and (iii) identifying high prescribers and their number of prescriptions above an age- and body-system-specific benchmark. Results: Applying the most conservative assumptions, 8.8% of all systemic antibiotic prescriptions in English primary care were identified as inappropriate, and in the least conservative scenario 23.1% of prescriptions were inappropriate. All practices had non-zero reduction potentials, ranging from 6.4% to 43.5% in the middle scenario. The four conditions that contributed most to inappropriate prescribing were sore throat (23.0% of identified inappropriate prescriptions), cough (22.2%), sinusitis (7.6%) and acute otitis media (5.7%). One-third of all antibiotic prescriptions lacked an informative diagnostic code. Conclusions: This work demonstrates (i) the existence of substantial inappropriate antibiotic prescribing and (ii) poor diagnostic coding in English primary care. All practices (not just the high prescribers) should engage in efforts to improve antimicrobial stewardship. Better diagnostic coding, more precise prescribing guidelines and a deeper understanding of appropriate long-term uses of antibiotics would allow identification of further potential for reductions.
Objectives: To identify and quantify inappropriate systemic antibiotic prescribing in primary care in England, and ultimately to determine the potential for reduction in prescribing of antibiotics. Methods: Primary care data from 2013-15 recorded in The Health Improvement Network (THIN) database were used. Potentially inappropriate prescribing events in the database were identified by: (i) comparing prescribing events against treatment guidelines; (ii) comparing actual proportions of consultations resulting in prescription for a set of conditions with the ideal proportions derived from expert opinion; and (iii) identifying high prescribers and their number of prescriptions above an age- and body-system-specific benchmark. Results: Applying the most conservative assumptions, 8.8% of all systemic antibiotic prescriptions in English primary care were identified as inappropriate, and in the least conservative scenario 23.1% of prescriptions were inappropriate. All practices had non-zero reduction potentials, ranging from 6.4% to 43.5% in the middle scenario. The four conditions that contributed most to inappropriate prescribing were sore throat (23.0% of identified inappropriate prescriptions), cough (22.2%), sinusitis (7.6%) and acute otitis media (5.7%). One-third of all antibiotic prescriptions lacked an informative diagnostic code. Conclusions: This work demonstrates (i) the existence of substantial inappropriate antibiotic prescribing and (ii) poor diagnostic coding in English primary care. All practices (not just the high prescribers) should engage in efforts to improve antimicrobial stewardship. Better diagnostic coding, more precise prescribing guidelines and a deeper understanding of appropriate long-term uses of antibiotics would allow identification of further potential for reductions.
Authors: Joep van den Broek d'Obrenan; Theo J M Verheij; Mattijs E Numans; Alike W van der Velden Journal: J Antimicrob Chemother Date: 2014-02-06 Impact factor: 5.790
Authors: Koen B Pouwels; F Christiaan K Dolk; David R M Smith; Julie V Robotham; Timo Smieszek Journal: J Antimicrob Chemother Date: 2018-02-01 Impact factor: 5.790
Authors: Verica Ivanovska; Karin Hek; Aukje K Mantel Teeuwisse; Hubert G M Leufkens; Mark M J Nielen; Liset van Dijk Journal: J Antimicrob Chemother Date: 2016-03-05 Impact factor: 5.790
Authors: Paul Little; F D Richard Hobbs; Michael Moore; David Mant; Ian Williamson; Cliodna McNulty; Ying Edith Cheng; Geraldine Leydon; Richard McManus; Joanne Kelly; Jane Barnett; Paul Glasziou; Mark Mullee Journal: BMJ Date: 2013-10-10
Authors: Mia Tyrstrup; Alike van der Velden; Sven Engstrom; Geert Goderis; Sigvard Molstad; Theo Verheij; Samuel Coenen; Niels Adriaenssens Journal: Scand J Prim Health Care Date: 2017-03-03 Impact factor: 2.581
Authors: Martin C Gulliford; Michael V Moore; Paul Little; Alastair D Hay; Robin Fox; A Toby Prevost; Dorota Juszczyk; Judith Charlton; Mark Ashworth Journal: BMJ Date: 2016-07-04
Authors: Christopher C Butler; Mandy Lau; David Gillespie; Eleri Owen-Jones; Mark Lown; Mandy Wootton; Philip C Calder; Antony J Bayer; Michael Moore; Paul Little; Jane Davies; Alison Edwards; Victoria Shepherd; Kerenza Hood; F D Richard Hobbs; Mina Davoudianfar; Heather Rutter; Helen Stanton; Rachel Lowe; Richard Fuller; Nick A Francis Journal: JAMA Date: 2020-07-07 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Koen B Pouwels; F Christiaan K Dolk; David R M Smith; Julie V Robotham; Timo Smieszek Journal: J Antimicrob Chemother Date: 2018-02-01 Impact factor: 5.790
Authors: F Christiaan K Dolk; Koen B Pouwels; David R M Smith; Julie V Robotham; Timo Smieszek Journal: J Antimicrob Chemother Date: 2018-02-01 Impact factor: 5.790
Authors: David R M Smith; F Christiaan K Dolk; Koen B Pouwels; Morag Christie; Julie V Robotham; Timo Smieszek Journal: J Antimicrob Chemother Date: 2018-02-01 Impact factor: 5.790
Authors: Koen B Pouwels; F Christiaan K Dolk; David R M Smith; Timo Smieszek; Julie V Robotham Journal: J Antimicrob Chemother Date: 2018-02-01 Impact factor: 5.790
Authors: Paula Gomes Alves; Gail Hayward; Geraldine Leydon; Rebecca Barnes; Catherine Woods; Joseph Webb; Matthew Booker; Helen Ireton; Sue Latter; Paul Little; Michael Moore; Clare-Louise Nicholls; Fiona Stevenson Journal: BJGP Open Date: 2021-06-30