Background Perceived patient demand for antibiotics drives unnecessary antibiotic prescribing in outpatient settings, but little is known about how clinicians experience this demand or how this perceived demand shapes their decision-making. Objective To identify how clinicians perceive patient demand for antibiotics and the way these perceptions stimulate unnecessary prescribing. Methods Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews with clinicians in outpatient settings who prescribe antibiotics. Interviews were analyzed using conventional and directed content analysis. Results Interviews were conducted with 25 clinicians from nine practices across three states. Patient demand was the most common reason respondents provided for why they prescribed non-indicated antibiotics. Three related factors motivated clinically unnecessary antibiotic use in the face of perceived patient demand: (i) clinicians want their patients to regard clinical visits as valuable and believe that an antibiotic prescription demonstrates value; (ii) clinicians want to avoid negative repercussions of denying antibiotics, including reduced income, damage to their reputation, emotional exhaustion, and degraded relationships with patients; (iii) clinicians believed that certain patients are impossible to satisfy without an antibiotic prescription and felt that efforts to refuse antibiotics to such patients wastes time and invites the aforementioned negative repercussions. Clinicians in urgent care settings were especially likely to describe being motivated by these factors. Conclusion Interventions to improve antibiotic use in the outpatient setting must address clinicians’ concerns about providing value for their patients, fear of negative repercussions from denying antibiotics, and the approach to inconvincible patients.

Objectives:Assess (1) if patients can improve their medical records’ accuracy if effectively engaged using a networked Personal Health Record; (2) workflow efficiency and reliability for receiving and processing patient feedback; and (3) patient feedback’s impact on medical record accuracy.Background:Improving medical record’ accuracy and associated challenges have been documented extensively. Providing patients with useful access to their records through information technology gives them new opportunities to improve their records’ accuracy and completeness. A new approach supporting online contributions to their medication lists by patients of Geisinger Health Systems, an online patient-engagement advocate, revealed this can be done successfully.In late 2011, Geisinger launched an online process for patients to provide electronic feedback on their medication lists’ accuracy before a doctor visit. Patient feedback was routed to a Geisinger pharmacist, who reviewed it and followed up with the patient before changing the medication list shared by the patient and the clinicians.Methods:The evaluation employed mixed methods and consisted of patient focus groups (users, nonusers, and partial users of the feedback form), semi structured interviews with providers and pharmacists, user observations with patients, and quantitative analysis of patient feedback data and pharmacists’ medication reconciliation logs.Findings/Discussion:(1) Patients were eager to provide feedback on their medications and saw numerous advantages. Thirty percent of patient feedback forms (457 of 1,500) were completed and submitted to Geisinger. Patients requested changes to the shared medication lists in 89 percent of cases (369 of 414 forms). These included frequency—or dosage changes to existing prescriptions and requests for new medications (prescriptions and over-the counter). (2) Patients provided useful and accurate online feedback. In a subsample of 107 forms, pharmacists responded positively to 68 percent of patient requests for medication list changes. (3) Processing patient feedback will requires both software algorithms and human interpretation. For the 107 forms subsample, pharmacists accepted patient input in 51 percent of cases where they could not contact the patient. Where the patient was contacted, they accepted feedback from 68 percent. This suggests there may be opportunities to automate feedback filtering and processing for more efficient (and larger scale) medication-list optimization. (4) A supportive overall e-health environment makes acceptance of an online patient feedback system more likely. Review of Geisinger usage data showed patients who completed the medication feedback form had previously accessed MyGeisinger 2.3 times as often as the average patient and initiated secure messages with a clinician 1.35 times as often as patients not involved in the pilot.Conclusions:Patient feedback, placed in a useful workflow, can improve medical record accuracy. Electronic health record (EHR) vendors and developers need to build ...

Key Points Question Is emphasizing improved communication, teamwork, and clinical best practices associated with reductions in antibiotic use across a large number of US hospitals? Findings In this quality improvement study of 402 hospitals, implementation of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Safety Program was associated with a reduction in antibiotic use and hospital-onset Clostridioides difficile infection rates, including critical access hospitals, rural hospitals, and hospitals without infectious diseases specialists. The greatest reduction in antibiotic use was observed in sites most actively engaged in the Safety Program. Meaning The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Safety Program resources, now publicly available, may be useful in teaching frontline clinicians to become stewards of their antibiotic use.

Background Social determinants of health (SDH) are increasingly seen as important to understanding patient health and identifying appropriate interventions to improve health outcomes in what is a complex interplay between health system-, community-, and individual-level factors. Objective The objective of the paper was to investigate the development of electronic health record (EHR) software products that allow health care providers to identify and address patients’ SDH in health care settings. Methods We conducted interviews with six EHR vendors with large market shares in both ambulatory and inpatient settings. We conducted thematic analysis of the interviews to (1) identify their motivations to develop such software products, (2) describe their products and uses, and (3) identify facilitators and challenges to collection and use of SDH data—through their products or otherwise—either at the point of care or in population health interventions. Results Our findings indicate that vendor systems and their functionalities are influenced by client demand and initiative, federal initiatives, and the vendors’ strategic vision about opportunities in the health care system. Among the small sample of vendors with large market shares, SDH is a new area for growth, and the vendors range in the number and sophistication of their SDH-related products. To enable better data analytics, population health management, and interoperability of SDH data, vendors recognized the need for more standardization of SDH performance measures across various federal and state programs, better mapping of SDH measures to multiple types of codes, and development of more codes for all SDH measures of interest. Conclusions Vendors indicate they are actively developing products to facilitate the collection and use of SDH data for their clients and are seeking solutions to data standardization and interoperability challenges through internal product decisions and collaboration with policymakers. Due to a lack of policy standards around SDH data, product-specific decisions may end up being de facto policies given the market shares of particular vendors. However, commercial vendors appear ready to collaboratively discuss policy solutions such as standards or guidelines with each other, health care systems, and government agencies in order to further promote integration of SDH data into the standard of care for all health systems.