Background Antibiotic overuse in the primary care setting is common. Our objective was to evaluate the effect of a clinical pathway-based intervention on antibiotic use. Methods Eight primary care clinics were randomized to receive clinical pathways for upper respiratory infection, acute bronchitis, acute rhinosinusitis, pharyngitis, acute otitis media, urinary tract infection, skin infections, and pneumonia and patient education materials (study group) versus no intervention (control group). Generalized linear mixed effects models were used to assess trends in antibiotic prescriptions for non-pneumonia acute respiratory infections and broad-spectrum antibiotic use for all eight conditions during a 2-year baseline and 1-year intervention period. Results In the study group, antibiotic prescriptions for non-pneumonia acute respiratory infections decreased from 42.7% of cases at baseline to 37.9% during the intervention period (11.2% relative reduction) (p <.0001) and from 39.8% to 38.7%, respectively, in the control group (2.8% relative reduction) (p=0.25). Overall use of broad-spectrum antibiotics in the study group decreased from 26.4% to 22.6% of cases, respectively, (14.4% relative reduction) (p <.0001) and from 20.0% to 19.4%, respectively, in the control group (3.0% relative reduction) (p=0.35). There were significant differences in the trends of prescriptions for acute respiratory infections (p<.0001) and broad-spectrum antibiotic use (p=0.001) between the study and control groups during the intervention period, with greater declines in the study group. Conclusions This intervention was associated with declining antibiotic prescriptions for non-pneumonia acute respiratory infections and use of broad-spectrum antibiotics over the first year. Evaluation of the impact over a longer study period is warranted.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

BackgroundWe sought to characterize how the term “missed opportunities” is reported in the literature in the context of immunization rates and to assess how missed opportunities can be operationalized.MethodsPeer-reviewed literature searches were conducted in April – May, 2015, to answer: “What methods research studies used to operationalize missed opportunities to vaccinate?” A meta-narrative review methodology was used.ResultsSeven studies met inclusion criteria. The methodologies for quantifying missed opportunities fell into two general categories based on: 1. the number of healthcare encounters per patient without appropriate vaccination services, defined as a number of visits per patient with no vaccination related services (Missed opportunities per patient); 2. vaccination status as “non-vaccinated” among a group of patients who had a healthcare encounter where the vaccination should/could have had happened (Missed opportunities per population).ConclusionsOur study provided an initial overview of the methods reported in the literature, and concluded that the quantifiable missed opportunity holds promise as a measurable outcome (variable) for research and quality improvement projects aimed to increase adult immunization recommendation and uptake in primary care.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12875-017-0694-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

No abstract

No abstract

Background: Adult immunization rates are below Healthy People 2020 targets. Our objective was to evaluate the effectiveness of a multicomponent intervention to improve adult immunization rates. Methods: This prospective interventional before-and-after non-randomized study was conducted through the American Academy of Family Physicians National Research Network with 43 primary care physicians from a large multi-specialty healthcare organization (multicomponent intervention group n = 23; comparator group n = 20) in the United States. The multicomponent intervention included provider reminders, quarterly provider-level performance reports, provider education, patient visual aid materials, and standing orders on adult pneumococcal, influenza, and zoster immunizations. We assessed individual and comparative provider-level vaccination rates and missed opportunities detailing concordance with targets established by Healthy People 2020 for pneumococcal, influenza, and zoster immunizations. Results: Vaccination rates increased after 12 months in intervention and comparator groups respectively for: a). influenza from 44.4 ± 16.7 to 51.3% ± 12.9% (by 6.9 percentage points, p = 0.001) and from 35.1 ± 19.1 to 41.3% ± 14.2%, (by 6.2 percentage points, p = 0.01); b). pneumococcal vaccinations in older adults from 62.8 ± 17.6 to 81.4% ± 16.6% (by 18.6 percentage points, for p < 0.0001) and from 55.9 ± 20.0 to 72.7% ± 18.4% (by 16.7 percentage points, p < 0.0001); and c). zoster from 37.1 ± 13.4 to 41.9% ± 13.1% (by 4.8 percentage points, p < 0.0001) and from 35.0 ± 18.7 to 42.3% ± 20.9% (7.3 percentage points, p = 0.001).