Audit and Feedback Interventions for Antibiotic Prescribing in Primary Care: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

This systematic review evaluates the effect of audit and feedback (A&F) interventions targeting antibiotic prescribing in primary care and examines factors that may explain the variation in effectiveness. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving A&F interventions targeting antibiotic pr...

Celý popis

Uloženo v:

Podrobná bibliografie
Vydáno v:	Clinical infectious diseases Ročník 80; číslo 2; s. 253
Hlavní autoři:	Xu, Alice X T, Brown, Kevin, Schwartz, Kevin L, Aghlmandi, Soheila, Alderson, Sarah, Brehaut, Jamie C, Brown, Benjamin C, Bucher, Heiner C, Clarkson, Janet, De Sutter, An, Francis, Nick A, Grimshaw, Jeremy, Gunnarsson, Ronny, Hallsworth, Michael, Hemkens, Lars, Høye, Sigurd, Khan, Tasneem, Lecky, Donna M, Leung, Felicia, Leung, Jeremy, Lindbæk, Morten, Linder, Jeffrey A, Llor, Carl, Little, Paul, O'Connor, Denise, Pulcini, Céline, Ramlackhan, Kalisha, Ramsay, Craig R, Sundvall, Pär-Daniel, Taljaard, Monica, Touboul Lundgren, Pia, Vellinga, Akke, Verbakel, Jan Y, Verheij, Theo J, Wikberg, Carl, Ivers, Noah
Médium:	Journal Article
Jazyk:	angličtina
Vydáno:	United States 24.02.2025
Témata:	Anti-Bacterial Agents - therapeutic use Antimicrobial Stewardship Drug Prescriptions - statistics & numerical data Feedback Humans Inappropriate Prescribing - prevention & control Practice Patterns, Physicians' - statistics & numerical data Primary Health Care Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic audit and feedback primary care systematic review antibiotics
ISSN:	1537-6591, 1537-6591
On-line přístup:	Zjistit podrobnosti o přístupu
Tagy:	Přidat tag Žádné tagy, Buďte první, kdo vytvoří štítek k tomuto záznamu!

Popis
Shrnutí:	This systematic review evaluates the effect of audit and feedback (A&F) interventions targeting antibiotic prescribing in primary care and examines factors that may explain the variation in effectiveness. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving A&F interventions targeting antibiotic prescribing in primary care were included in the systematic review. Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched up to May 2024. Trial, participant, and intervention characteristics were extracted independently by 2 researchers. Random effects meta-analyses of trials that compared interventions with and without A&F were conducted for 4 outcomes: (1) total antibiotic prescribing volume; (2) unnecessary antibiotic initiation; (3) excessive prescription duration, and (4) broad-spectrum antibiotic selection. A stratified analysis was also performed based on study characteristics and A&F intervention design features for total antibiotic volume. A total of 56 RCTs fit the eligibility criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. A&F was associated with an 11% relative reduction in antibiotic prescribing volume (N = 21 studies, rate ratio [RR] = 0.89; 95% confidence interval [CI]: .84, .95; I2 = 97); 23% relative reduction in unnecessary antibiotic initiation (N = 16 studies, RR = 0.77; 95% CI: .68, .87; I2 = 72); 13% relative reduction in prolonged duration of antibiotic course (N = 4 studies, RR = 0.87 95% CI: .81, .94; I2 = 86); and 17% relative reduction in broad-spectrum antibiotic selection (N = 17 studies, RR = 0.83 95% CI: .75, .93; I2 = 96). A&F interventions reduce antibiotic prescribing in primary care. However, heterogeneity was substantial, outcome definitions were not standardized across the trials, and intervention fidelity was not consistently assessed. Clinical Trials Registration. Prospero (CRD42022298297).
Bibliografie:	ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23 ObjectType-Undefined-3
ISSN:	1537-6591 1537-6591
DOI:	10.1093/cid/ciae604