24
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Why do general practitioners prescribe antibiotics for upper respiratory tract infections to meet patient expectations: a mixed methods study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objectives

          To describe the role patient expectations play in general practitioners (GPs) antibiotic prescribing for upper respiratory tract infections (URTI).

          Methods

          Concurrent explanatory mixed methods approach using a cross-sectional survey and semistructured interviews.

          Settings

          Primary care GPs in Australia.

          Participants

          584 GPs (response rate of 23.6%) completed the cross-sectional survey. 32 GPs were interviewed individually.

          Outcome measure

          Prescribing of antibiotics for URTI.

          Results

          More than half the GP respondents to the survey in Australia self-reported that they would prescribe antibiotics for an URTI to meet patient expectations. Our qualitative findings suggest that ‘patient expectations’ may be the main reason given for inappropriate prescribing, but it is an all-encompassing phrase that includes other reasons. These include limited time, poor doctor–patient communication and diagnostic uncertainty. We have identified three role archetypes to explain the behaviour of GPs in reference to antibiotic prescribing for URTIs. The main themes emerging from the qualitative component was that many GPs did not think that antibiotic prescribing in primary care was responsible for the development of antibiotic resistance nor that their individual prescribing would make any difference in light of other bigger issues like hospital prescribing or veterinary use. For them, there were negligible negative consequences from their inappropriate prescribing.

          Conclusions

          There is a need to increase awareness of the scope and magnitude of antibiotic resistance and the role primary care prescribing plays, and of the contribution of individual prescribing decisions to the problem of antibiotic resistance.

          Related collections

          Most cited references17

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Understanding the culture of prescribing: qualitative study of general practitioners' and patients' perceptions of antibiotics for sore throats.

          To better understand reasons for antibiotics being prescribed for sore throats despite well known evidence that they are generally of little help. Qualitative study with semi-structured interviews. General practices in South Wales. 21 general practitioners and 17 of their patients who had recently consulted for a sore throat or upper respiratory tract infection. Subjects' experience of management of the illness, patients' expectations, beliefs about antibiotic treatment for sore throats, and ideas for reducing prescribing. Doctors knew of the evidence for marginal effectiveness yet often prescribed for good relationships with patients. Possible patient benefit outweighed theoretical community risk from resistant bacteria. Most doctors found prescribing "against the evidence" uncomfortable and realised this probably increased workload. Explanations of the distinction between virus and bacterium often led to perceived confusion. Clinicians were divided on the value of leaflets and national campaigns, but several favoured patient empowerment for self care by other members of the primary care team. Patient expectations were seldom made explicit, and many were not met. A third of patients had a clear expectation for antibiotics, and mothers were more likely to accept non-antibiotic treatment for their children than for themselves. Satisfaction was not necessarily related to receiving antibiotics, with many seeking reassurance, further information, and pain relief. This prescribing decision is greatly influenced by considerations of the doctor-patient relationship. Consulting strategies that make patient expectations explicit without damaging relationships might reduce unwanted antibiotics. Repeating evidence for lack of effectiveness is unlikely to change doctors' prescribing, but information about risk to individual patients might. Emphasising positive aspects of non-antibiotic treatment and lack of efficacy in general might be helpful.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Why do general practitioners prescribe antibiotics for sore throat? Grounded theory interview study.

            To understand why general practitioners prescribe antibiotics for some cases of sore throat and to explore the factors that influence their prescribing. Grounded theory interview study. General practice. 40 general practitioners: 25 in the maximum variety sample and 15 in the theoretical sample. General practitioners are uncertain which patients will benefit from antibiotics but prescribe for sicker patients and for patients from socioeconomically deprived backgrounds because of concerns about complications. They are also more likely to prescribe in pressured clinical contexts. Doctors are mostly comfortable with their prescribing decisions and are not prescribing to maintain the doctor-patient relationship. General practitioners have reduced prescribing for sore throat in response to research and policy initiatives. Further interventions to reduce prescribing would need to improve identification of patients at risk of complications and be workable in busy clinical situations.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Prescribing behaviour in clinical practice: patients' expectations and doctors' perceptions of patients' expectations--a questionnaire study.

              To examine the effect of patients' expectations for medication and doctors' perceptions of patients' expectations on prescribing when patients present with new conditions. Questionnaire study of practitioners and patients. General practice in Newcastle, Australia. 22 non-randomly selected general practitioners and 336 of their patients with a newly diagnosed medical condition. Prescription of medication and expectation of it. Medication was prescribed for 169 (50%) patients. After controlling for the presenting condition, patients who expected medication were nearly three times more likely to receive medication (odds ratio = 2.9, 95% confidence interval 1.3 to 6.3). When the general practitioner thought the patient expected medication the patient was 10 times more likely to receive it (odds ratio = 10.1, 5.3 to 19.6). A significant association existed between patients' expectation and doctors' perception of patients' expectation (chi 2 = 52.0, df = 4, P = 0.001). For all categories of patient expectation, however, patients were more likely to receive medication when the practitioner judged the patient to want medication than when the practitioner ascribed no expectation to the patient. Although patients brought expectations to the consultation regarding medication, the doctors' opinions about their expectations were the strongest determinants of prescribing.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Open
                bmjopen
                bmjopen
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                2044-6055
                2016
                24 October 2016
                : 6
                : 10
                : e012244
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Population Health , South Western Sydney Local Health District, Liverpool, New South Wales, Australia
                [2 ]Evaluation, NPS MedicineWise , Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
                [3 ]Oslo kommune Helseetaten , Oslo, Norway
                [4 ]Centre for Primary Health Care and Equity , University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Rabia Khan; rabia.khan@ 123456unsw.edu.au
                Article
                bmjopen-2016-012244
                10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012244
                5093394
                27798010
                9bda4a14-8d9b-4505-a03f-edd99435fe4f
                Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/

                This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

                History
                : 12 April 2016
                : 8 July 2016
                : 9 August 2016
                Funding
                Funded by: Department of Health, Australian Government, http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100003921;
                Categories
                Health Services Research
                Research
                1506
                1704
                1706
                1724

                Medicine
                primary care,upper respiratory tract infection,antibiotics,inappropriate prescribing
                Medicine
                primary care, upper respiratory tract infection, antibiotics, inappropriate prescribing

                Comments

                Comment on this article