Search

Background Molecular diagnostic tests may improve antibiotic prescribing by enabling earlier tailoring of antimicrobial therapy. However, clinicians' trust and acceptance of these tests will determine their application in practice. Objectives To examine ICU prescribers' views on the application of molecular diagnostics in patients with suspected hospital-acquired and ventilator-associated pneumonia (HAP/VAP). Methods Sixty-three ICU clinicians from five UK hospitals completed a cross-sectional questionnaire between May 2020 and July 2020 assessing attitudes towards using molecular diagnostics to inform initial agent choice and to help stop broad-spectrum antibiotics early. Results Attitudes towards using molecular diagnostics to inform initial treatment choices and to stop broad-spectrum antibiotics early were nuanced. Most (83%) were positive about molecular diagnostics, agreeing that using results to inform broad-spectrum antibiotic prescribing is good practice. However, many (58%) believed sick patients are often too unstable to risk stopping broad-spectrum antibiotics based on a negative result. Conclusions Positive attitudes towards the application of molecular diagnostics to improve antibiotic stewardship were juxtapositioned against the perceived need to initiate and maintain broad-spectrum antibiotics to protect unstable patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Antibiotics are extensively prescribed in intensive care units (ICUs), yet little is known about how antibiotic-related decisions are made in this setting. We explored how beliefs, perceptions and contextual factors influenced ICU clinicians' antibiotic prescribing. Methods We conducted 4 focus groups and 34 semistructured interviews with clinicians involved in antibiotic prescribing in four English ICUs. Focus groups explored factors influencing prescribing, whereas interviews examined decision-making processes using two clinical vignettes. Data were analysed using thematic analysis, applying the Necessity Concerns Framework. Results Clinicians' antibiotic decisions were influenced by their judgement of the necessity for prescribing/not prescribing, relative to their concerns about potential adverse consequences. Antibiotic necessity perceptions were strongly influenced by beliefs that antibiotics would protect patients from deterioration and themselves from the ethical and legal consequences of undertreatment. Clinicians also reported concerns about prescribing antibiotics. These generally centred on antimicrobial resistance; however, protecting the individual patient was prioritised over these societal concerns. Few participants identified antibiotic toxicity concerns as a key influencer. Clinical uncertainty often complicated balancing antibiotic necessity against concerns. Decisions to start or continue antibiotics often represented 'erring on the side of caution' as a protective response in uncertainty. This approach was reinforced by previous experiences of negative consequences ('being burnt') which motivated prescribing 'just in case' of an infection. Prescribing decisions were also context-dependent, exemplified by a lower perceived threshold to prescribe antibiotics out-of-hours, input from external team members and local prescribing norms. Conclusion Efforts to improve antibiotic stewardship should consider clinicians' desire to protect with a prescription. Rapid molecular microbiology, with appropriate communication, may diminish clinicians' fears of not prescribing or of using narrower-spectrum antibiotics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]