The effect of interventions aiming to optimise the prescription of antibiotics in dental care—A systematic review

Abstract

BackgroundAbundant evidence in dentistry suggests that antibiotics are prescribed despite the existence of guidelines aiming to reduce the development of antibiotic resistance. This review investigated (1) which type of interventions aiming to optimise prescription of antibiotics exist in dentistry, (2) the effect of these interventions and (3) the specific strengths and limitations of the studies reporting on these interventions.MethodLiterature search was based on Medline, Embase, Global Health, Cochrane CENTRAL, ClinicalTrials.gov and Current Controlled Trials. Studies with one of the two primary outcomes were included: (1) The number of antibiotics prescribed and/or (2) the accuracy of the prescription, commonly measured as a percentage of adherence to local clinical guidelines.ResultsNine studies met these inclusion criteria. Five studies reported on the prescription of antibiotics in primary dental care and four studies focused on outpatient dental care. Interventions used in primary dental care included a combination of audit, feedback, education, local consensus, dissemination of guidelines and/or academic detailing. Trials in the outpatient setting made use of expert panel discussions, educational feedback on previous acts of prescribing, the dissemination of guidelines and the establishment of internal guidelines. All studies successfully reduced the number of antibiotics prescribed and/or increased the accuracy of the prescription. However, most studies were confounded by a high risk of selection bias, selective outcome reporting and high variance across study groups. In particular, information relating to study design and methodology was insufficient. Only three studies related the prescriptions to the number of patients treated with antibiotics.ConclusionsThis systematic review was able to offer conclusions which took the limitations of the investigated studies into account. Unfortunately, few studies could be included and many of these studies were confounded by a low quality of scientific reporting and lack of information regarding study methodology. High-quality research with objective and standardised outcome reporting, longer periods of follow-up, rigorous methodology and adequate standard of study reporting is urgently needed.

Clinician and Patient Factors Influencing Treatment Decisions: Ethnographic Study of Antibiotic Prescribing and Operative Procedures in Out-of-Hours and General Dental Practices

“…The need for new dental antibiotic stewardship (ABS) programmes and interventions designed with the context in mind and underpinned by behavioural science has been previously identified [17,18]. The Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) is a theoretical lens through which to view the cognitive, affective, social and environmental influences on behaviour [19].…”

Comparison of antimicrobial prescribing for dental and oral infections in England and Scotland with Norway and Sweden and their relative contribution to national consumption 2010–2016

“…National data on antibiotic use by dentists can be used to identify priorities for antibiotic stewardship in dentistry and inform management and prescribing guidance. There are some reports of good outcomes following a variety of interventions [17].…”

Observación e intervención educativa para modificar la prescripción de antibióticos en un instituto social de la ciudad de Corrientes, Argentina

“…En 2017, Löffler C. et al (28) realizaron una revisión sistemática con el objetivo de investigar si las intervenciones se asociaron con cambios en la prescripción y sostienen que la mayoría de estos estudios utilizaron elementos cognitivos como auditorías clínicas, visitas educativas o comentarios. Sin embargo, no hubo evidencia sistemática sobre si estas intervenciones fueron capaces de producir cambios sostenidos en la prescripción de antibióticos.…”