Objective To assess the effects of a multifaceted educational intervention in Norwegian general practice aiming to reduce antibiotic prescription rates for acute respiratory tract infections and to reduce the use of broad spectrum antibiotics.Design Cluster randomised controlled study.Setting Existing continuing medical education groups were recruited and randomised to intervention or control.Participants 79 groups, comprising 382 general practitioners, completed the interventions and data extractions.Interventions The intervention groups had two visits by peer academic detailers, the first presenting the national clinical guidelines for antibiotic use and recent research evidence on acute respiratory tract infections, the second based on feedback reports on each general practitioner’s antibiotic prescribing profile from the preceding year. Regional one day seminars were arranged as a supplement. The control arm received a different intervention targeting prescribing practice for older patients.Main outcome measures Prescription rates and proportion of non-penicillin V antibiotics prescribed at the group level before and after the intervention, compared with corresponding data from the controls.Results In an adjusted, multilevel model, the effect of the intervention on the 39 intervention groups (183 general practitioners) was a reduction (odds ratio 0.72, 95% confidence interval 0.61 to 0.84) in prescribing of antibiotics for acute respiratory tract infections compared with the controls (40 continuing medical education groups with 199 general practitioners). A corresponding reduction was seen in the odds (0.64, 0.49 to 0.82) for prescribing a non-penicillin V antibiotic when an antibiotic was issued. Prescriptions per 1000 listed patients increased from 80.3 to 84.6 in the intervention arm and from 80.9 to 89.0 in the control arm, but this reflects a greater incidence of infections (particularly pneumonia) that needed treating in the intervention arm.Conclusions The intervention led to improved antibiotic prescribing for respiratory tract infections in a representative sample of Norwegian general practitioners, and the courses were feasible to the general practitioners.Trial registration Clinical trials NCT00272155.

BackgroundThe Prescription Peer Academic Detailing (Rx-PAD) project is an educational intervention study aiming at improving GPs' competence in pharmacotherapy. GPs in CME peer groups were randomised to receive a tailored intervention, either to support a safer prescription practice for elderly patients or to improve prescribing of antibiotics to patients with respiratory tract infections. The project was based on the principles of peer group academic detailing, incorporating individual feedback on GPs' prescription patterns. We did a study to explore GPs and tutors' experiences with peer group academic detailing, and to explore GPs' reasons for deviating from recommended prescribing practice.MethodsData was collected through nine focus group interviews with a total of 39 GPs and 20 tutors. Transcripts from the interviews were analyzed by two researchers according to a procedure for thematic content analysis.ResultsA shared understanding of the complex decision-making involved in prescribing in general practice was reported by both GPs and tutors as essential for an open discussion in the CME groups. Tutors experienced that CME groups differed regarding structure and atmosphere, and in some groups it was a challenge to run the scheme as planned. Individual feedback motivated GPs to reflect on and to improve their prescribing practice, though feedback reports could cause distress if the prescribing practice was unfavourable. Explanations for inappropriate prescriptions were lack of knowledge, factors associated with patients, the GP's background, the practice, and other health professionals or health care facilities.ConclusionsGPs and tutors experienced peer group academic detailing as a suitable method to discuss and learn more about pharmacotherapy. An important outcome for GPs was being more reflective about their prescriptions. Disclosure of inappropriate prescribing can cause distress in some doctors, and tutors must be prepared to recognise and manage such reactions.

BackgroundDelayed prescribing has been promoted as a strategy that meets patients' expectations and helps to avoid unnecessary use of antibiotics in upper respiratory tract infections.

PurposeTo examine factors correlating with antibiotic prescribing for acute respiratory tract infections (ARTIs) in Norwegian primary care out-of-hours service.Materials and methodsRetrospective data analysis for the year 2014 in two out-of-hours primary care units located in the towns of Hamar and Tønsberg in Norway, analysing type and frequency of different antibiotics prescribed by 117 medical doctors for ARTIs, and factors correlating with these.ResultsThe 117 doctors in two out-of-hours units diagnosed 6757 cases of ARTIs. 2310 (34.2%) of these resulted in an antibiotic prescription, where of 1615 (69.9%) were penicillin V (PcV). Tonsillitis and sinusitis were the two ARTI diagnoses with the highest antibiotic prescription rate. The antibiotic prescription rate increased successively with increasing activity level, measured as shorter median duration of consultations per session, from 28.7% (reference) in the least busy quintile of sessions to 36.6% (OR: 1.38 (95% CI =1.06–1.80)) in the busiest quintile of sessions. Prescribing of broad-spectrum antibiotics was not correlated with median duration of consultations per session. Female doctors had an OR of 0.61 (0.40–0.92) of a broad-spectrum antibiotic prescription compared to their male colleagues.ConclusionsAntibiotic prescribing for ARTIs in the primary care out-of-hours services investigated is at the same level as in Norwegian general practice, but with a higher prescription rate of PcV. Antibiotic prescribing increases on busy sessions, measured as median duration of consultations per session. The work frame in primary care out-of-hours service might influence the quality of clinical decisions.

BackgroundDelayed prescribing of antibiotics for respiratory tract infections (RTIs) lowers the amount of antibiotics consumed. Several national treatment guidelines on RTIs recommend the strategy. When advocating treatment innovations, the feasibility and credibility of the innovation must be taken into account. The objective of this study was to explore GPs use and patients uptake of wait-and-see prescriptions for RTIs, and to investigate the feasibility of the strategy from GPs' and patients' perspectives.MethodsQuestionnaire survey among Norwegian GPs issuing and patients receiving a wait-and-see-prescription for RTIs. Patients reported symptoms, confidence and antibiotics consumption, GPs reported diagnoses, reason for issuing a wait-and-see-prescription and their opinion about the method.Results304 response pairs from consultations with 49 GPs were received. The patient response rate was 80%. The most common diagnosis for the GPs to issue a wait-and-see prescription was sinusitis (33%) and otitis (21%). 46% of the patients reported to consume the antibiotics. When adjusted for other factors, the diagnosis did not predict antibiotic consumption, but both being 16 years or more (p = 0,006) and reporting to have a fever (p = 0,012) doubled the odds of antibiotic consumption, while feeling very ill more than quadrupled the odds (p = 0,002). In 210 cases (69%), the GP found delayed prescribing a very reasonable strategy, and 270 patients (89%) would prefer to receive a wait-and-see prescription in a similar situation in the future. The GPs found delayed prescribing very reasonable most frequently in cases of sinusitis (79%, p = 0,007) and least frequently in cases of lower RTIs (49%, p = 0,002).ConclusionMost patients and GPs are satisfied with the delayed prescribing strategy. The patients' age, symptoms and malaise are more important than the diagnosis in predicting antibiotic consumption. The GP's view of the method as a reasonable approach depends on the patient's diagnosis. In our setting, delayed prescribing seems to be a feasible strategy, especially in cases of sinusitis and otitis. Educational efforts to promote delayed prescribing in similar settings should focus on these diagnoses.