Background
Antibiotic prescription rates in primary care in Germany are moderate, but still considered too high. The ARena study (Sustainable reduction of antibiotic-induced antimicrobial resistance) was initiated to foster awareness and understanding of the growing challenge and promotes rational antibiotics use for acute, non-complicated and self-limiting infections.
Methods
The present study was performed as part of the process evaluation of the ARena study. Interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of physicians participating in the ARena study to identify factors relevant to primary care physicians’ decision-making when prescribing antibiotics for acute non-complicated infections. Generated data were audio-recorded. Pseudonymized verbatim transcripts were coded using a pre-defined framework. The Dual Process Theory was applied to provide understanding of individual health professional factors that induce dysrational prescribing decisions.
Results
Based on medical as well as non-medical considerations, physicians developed habits in decision making on antibiotics prescribing. They acknowledged inadequate antibiotics prescribing for acute, non-complicated infections in situations involving uncertainty regarding diagnosis, prognosis, continuity of care, patient expectations and when not knowing the patient. Educative efforts empowered physicians to override habitual prescribing. A theory-driven model provides transparency as to how dysrational prescribing decisions occur and suggests remedy by providing new experiences and new recognizable patterns through educative efforts.
Conclusions
Educational interventions may only change prescribing behaviours if they result in active rational rather than routine-based decision-making on antibiotics prescribing.
Trial registration
ISRCTN, ISRCTN58150046.
Background Antibiotics prescription rates are relatively high in primary care in Germany. Patients’ expectations have frequently been mentioned as reason for high prescription rates. The extent to which patients’ expectations play a role and the strategies that physicians use to deal with these expectations and prevent non-indicated prescriptions in acute, uncomplicated infections are the subject of this paper.Methods In this qualitative study, twenty-seven semi-structured interviews with physicians were conducted in 2018. Data were audiotaped, pseudonymized and transcribed verbatim. The analysis was based on a framework analysis according to the Tailored Implementation in Chronic Diseases (TICD) checklist, and was expanded for deeper analysis and completed with the Behavior Change Techniques (BCT) taxonomy. Results The data revealed that patients’ expectations regarding the prescription of antibiotics can play an important role, although they may be ignored by physicians. If physicians respond to patients’ expectations, they use various strategies to deal and communicate with patients. Successful communication is more often achieved, if the physician takes sufficient time with the patient and if this results in a cooperative conversation. Thus, patients get informed about antibiotics and antimicrobial resistance, and it is possible to discuss alternative treatments. Seven strategies from the BCT taxonomy were mentioned by physicians in this study.Conclusion Constructive physician-patient communication was key to reducing antibiotic prescribing. The range of behavior change techniques mentioned by physicians was relatively limited and the use of a wider range of strategies could be the focus of future implementation strategies. Trial registration: ISRCTN, ISRCTN58150046. Registered 24 August 2017. Keywords Antibiotics prescription, patient expectations, physician-patient communication, patient education, communication strategies, behavior change technique, qualitative research
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.