Search

Background: Postgraduate training has the potential to shape the prescribing practices of young doctors.Objectives: To investigate the practices, attitudes and beliefs on antibiotic use and resistance in young doctors of different specialties.Methods: We performed an international web-based exploratory survey. Principal component analysis (PCA) and bivariate and multivariate [analysis of variance (ANOVA)] analyses were used to investigate differences between young doctors according to their country of specialization, specialty, year of training and gender.Results: Of the 2366 participants from France, Greece, Italy, Portugal, Slovenia and Spain, 54.2% of young doctors prescribed antibiotics predominantly as instructed by a mentor. Associations between the variability of answers and the country of training were observed across most questions, followed by variability according to the specialty. Very few differences were associated with the year of training and gender. PCA revealed five dimensions of antibiotic prescribing culture: self-assessment of knowledge, consideration of side effects, perception of prescription patterns, consideration of patient sickness and perception of antibiotic resistance. Only the country of specialization (partial η2 0.010-0.111) and the type of specialization (0.013-0.032) had a significant effect on all five identified dimensions (P < 0.01). The strongest effects were observed on self-assessed knowledge and in the perception of antibiotic resistance.Conclusions: The country of specialization followed by the type of specialization are the most important determinants of young doctors' perspectives on antibiotic use and resistance. The inclusion of competencies in antibiotic use in all specialty curricula and international harmonization of training should be considered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Giving advice about antibiotic prescription through dedicated consultations is a cornerstone of antibiotic stewardship programmes. Our objective was to explore practices, organisation, and regulatory requirements related to antibiotic advising. Methods: We performed an international, exploratory, Internet-based, cross-sectional survey targeting infectious diseases and clinical microbiology specialists. It was disseminated through ESCMID and ESGAP networks. Results: Answers from 830 participants (74 countries, 77% of participants from Europe) were collected. Consultations were mostly given on demand (81%, 619/764), while unsolicited consultations targeting specific conditions (e.g., positive blood culture) were less frequent (66%, 501/764). Consultations usually included indications on diagnostic work-up and follow-up (> 79%). Curbside consultations (i.e., without examining the patient) were reported by 82% (598/733) of respondents, mainly by phone (89%, 531/598). The referring physician was considered authorised not to follow the advice by 57% (383/676). Direct consultations (i.e., after examining the patient) were recorded in the medical file more frequently than curbside consultations (69%, 472/689 vs 35%, 206/592). Concerning legal liability, the majority of respondents considered that it is shared between the adviser and the referring physician, who, however, is considered primarily responsible. The advisers' liability was considered to be lower in cases of curbside and unrecorded consultations. Significant inter-countries and intra-country variability were identified, suggesting that the setting markedly influenced practices. Conclusion: Significant variability exists in the practice of antibiotic advising. This concerns both the organisation of care and how advisers perceive regulatory requirements. These elements must be taken into account when implementing antibiotic stewardship programmes and when training stewards. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To investigate fear of legal claims and defensive behaviours among specialists in infectious diseases (ID) and clinical microbiology (CM) and to identify associated demographic and professional characteristics.Methods: AntibioLegalMap was an international cross-sectional internet-based survey targeting specialists in ID and CM. Three variables were explored: fear of legal liability in antibiotic prescribing/advising on antibiotic prescription; defensive behaviours in antibiotic prescribing; and defensive behaviours in advising. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify factors significantly associated with each of the three variables.Results: Eight hundred and thirty individuals from 74 countries participated. Only 0.4% (3/779) had any kind of condemnation for malpractice related to antibiotic prescription. Concerning the fear of liability, 21.2% (164/774) of respondents said they never worried, 45.1% (349/774) sometimes worried and 28.6% (221/774) frequently worried when prescribing/advising on antibiotic prescription. Being female, younger than or equal to 35 years and aware of previous cases of litigation were independently associated with fear. Most respondents (85.0%, 525/618) reported some defensive behaviour in antibiotic prescribing. These behaviours were independently associated with being younger than or equal to 35 years and sometimes or often worried about liability. Similarly, 76.4% (505/661) reported defensive behaviours in advising. These behaviours were associated with being sometimes or often worried about liability. The preferred measures to reduce fear and defensive behaviours were having local guidelines and sharing decisions through teamwork.Conclusions: A significant proportion of specialists in ID and CM reported some form of defensive behaviour in prescribing or advising to prescribe antibiotics. Defensive medicine should be considered when implementing antibiotic stewardship programmes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To evaluate the current practice and the willingness to shorten the duration of antibiotic therapy among infection specialists.Methods: Infection specialists giving at least weekly advice on antibiotic prescriptions were invited to participate in an online cross-sectional survey between September and December 2016. The questionnaire included 15 clinical vignettes corresponding to common clinical cases with favourable outcomes; part A asked about the antibiotic treatment duration they would usually advise to prescribers and part B asked about the shortest duration they were willing to recommend.Results: We included 866 participants, mostly clinical microbiologists (22.8%, 197/863) or infectious diseases specialists (58.7%, 507/863), members of an antibiotic stewardship team in 73% (624/854) of the cases, coming from 58 countries on all continents. Thirty-six percent of participants (271/749) already advised short durations of antibiotic therapy (compared with the literature) to prescribers for more than half of the vignettes and 47% (312/662) chose shorter durations in part B compared with part A for more than half of the vignettes. Twenty-two percent (192/861) of the participants declared that their regional/national guidelines expressed durations of antibiotic therapy for a specific clinical situation as a fixed duration as opposed to a range and in the multivariable analysis this was associated with respondents advising short durations for more than half of the vignettes (adjusted OR 1.5, P = 0.02).Conclusions: The majority of infection specialists currently do not advise the shortest possible duration of antibiotic therapy to prescribers. Promoting short durations among these experts is urgently needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) are increasingly being used by clinicians to support antibiotic decision making in infection management. However, coexisting CDSSs often target different types of physicians, infectious situations, and patient profiles. The objective of this study was to perform an up-to-date inventory of French language CDSSs currently used in community and hospital settings for antimicrobial prescribing and to describe their main characteristics. A literature search, a search among smartphone application stores, and an open discussion with antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) experts were conducted in order to identify available French language CDSSs. Any clinical decision support tool that provides a personalized recommendation based on a clinical situation and/or a patient was included. Eleven CDSSs were identified through the search strategy. Of the 11 CDSSs, only 2 had been the subject of published studies, while 9 CDSSs were identified through smartphone application stores and expert knowledge. The majority of CDSSs were available free of charge (n = 8/11, 73%). Most CDSSs were accessible via smartphone applications (n = 9/11, 82%) and online websites (n = 8/11, 73%). Recommendations for antibiotic prescribing in urinary tract infections, upper and lower respiratory tract infections, and digestive tract infections were provided by over 90% of the CDSSs. More than 90% of the CDSSs displayed recommendations for antibiotic selection, prioritization, dosage, duration, route of administration, and alternative antibiotics in case of allergy. Information about antibiotic side effects, prescription recommendations for specific patient profiles and adaptation to local epidemiology were often missing or incomplete. There is a significant but heterogeneous offer for antibiotic prescribing decision support in French language. Standardized evaluation of these systems is needed to assess their impact on antimicrobial prescribing and antimicrobial resistance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]