244 research outputs found

    Is penicillin allergy de-labelling about to find its place in UK antimicrobial stewardship strategy?

    Get PDF
    Penicillin allergy records are common, often incorrect, limit antibiotic treatment options and associated with patient and health system harm. The large numbers of patients with penicillin allergy records and the paucity of allergists have led researchers to explore non-allergist delivered assessment of penicillin allergy records and removal of those inconsistent with allergy (called de-labelling). A recent systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature concludes non-allergist delivery of penicillin allergy de-labelling to be safe and effective. Several countries outside Europe have endorsed non-allergist de-labelling and produced national guidelines and toolkits for de-labelling, but until recently the UK lacked such guidance. In September 2022 the British Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (BSACI) produced their guidelines endorsing non-allergist delivered penicillin allergy de-labelling. These BSACI guidelines, coupled with the ongoing NIHR funded penicillin allergy de-labelling studies, will enable this important patient safety and antimicrobial stewardship intervention to become standard of care for NHS patients

    Understanding by older patients of dialysis and conservative management for chronic kidney failure

    Get PDF
    This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License CC BY NC-ND 4.0 ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ ), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, and is not altered, transformed, or built upon in any way.BACKGROUND: Older adults with chronic kidney disease stage 5 may be offered a choice between dialysis and conservative management. Few studies have explored patients' reasons for choosing conservative management and none have compared the views of those who have chosen different treatments across renal units. STUDY DESIGN: Qualitative study with semistructured interviews. SETTINGS & PARTICIPANTS: Patients 75 years or older recruited from 9 renal units. Units were chosen to reflect variation in the scale of delivery of conservative management. METHODOLOGY: Semistructured interviews audiorecorded and transcribed verbatim. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Data were analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: 42 interviews were completed, 4 to 6 per renal unit. Patients were sampled from those receiving dialysis, those preparing for dialysis, and those choosing conservative management. 14 patients in each group were interviewed. Patients who had chosen different treatments held varying beliefs about what dialysis could offer. The information that patients reported receiving from clinical staff differed between units. Patients from units with a more established conservative management pathway were more aware of conservative management, less often believed that dialysis would guarantee longevity, and more often had discussed the future with staff. Some patients receiving conservative management reported that they would have dialysis if they became unwell in the future, indicating the conditional nature of their decision. LIMITATIONS: Recruitment of older adults with frailty and comorbid conditions was difficult and therefore transferability of findings to this population is limited. CONCLUSIONS: Older adults with chronic kidney disease stage 5 who have chosen different treatment options have contrasting beliefs about the likely outcomes of dialysis for those who are influenced by information provided by renal units. Supporting renal staff in discussing conservative management as a valid alternative to dialysis for a subset of patients will aid informed decision making. There is a need for better evidence about conservative management to support shared decision making for older people with chronic kidney failure.Peer reviewedFinal Published versio

    Development of an intervention to support the implementation of evidence-based strategies for optimising antibiotic prescribing in general practice.

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Trials show that antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) strategies, including communication skills training, point-of-care C-reactive protein testing (POC-CRPT) and delayed prescriptions, help optimise antibiotic prescribing and use in primary care. However, the use of these strategies in general practice is limited and inconsistent. We aimed to develop an intervention to enhance uptake and implementation of these strategies in primary care. METHODS: We drew on the Person-Based Approach to develop an implementation intervention in two stages. (1) Planning and design: We defined the problem in behavioural terms drawing on existing literature and conducting primary qualitative research (nine focus groups) in high-prescribing general practices. We identified 'guiding principles' with intervention objectives and key features and developed logic models representing intended mechanisms of action. (2) Developing the intervention: We created prototype intervention materials and discussed and refined these with input from 13 health professionals and 14 citizens in two sets of design workshops. We further refined the intervention materials following think-aloud interviews with 22 health professionals. RESULTS: Focus groups highlighted uncertainties about how strategies could be used. Health professionals in the workshops suggested having practice champions, brief summaries of each AMS strategy and evidence supporting the AMS strategies, and they and citizens gave examples of helpful communication strategies/phrases. Think-aloud interviews helped clarify and shorten the text and user journey of the intervention materials. The intervention comprised components to support practice-level implementation: antibiotic champions, practice meetings with slides provided, and an 'implementation support' website section, and components to support individual-level uptake: website sections on each AMS strategy (with evidence, instructions, links to electronic resources) and material resources (patient leaflets, POC-CRPT equipment, clinician handouts). CONCLUSIONS: We used a systematic, user-focussed process of developing a behavioural intervention, illustrating how it can be used in an implementation context. This resulted in a multicomponent intervention to facilitate practice-wide implementation of evidence-based strategies which now requires implementing and evaluating. Focusing on supporting the uptake and implementation of evidence-based strategies to optimise antibiotic use in general practice is critical to further support appropriate antibiotic use and mitigate antimicrobial resistance

    The effectiveness of interventions that support penicillin allergy assessment and de-labelling of adult and paediatric patients by non-allergy specialists: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

    Get PDF
    INTRODUCTION: Penicillin allergy records are often incorrect and may result in harm. We aimed to systematically review the effectiveness and safety of non-allergist healthcare worker delivery of penicillin allergy de-labelling (PADL). METHODS: We searched EMBASE/ MEDLINE/ CINAHL (Ovid), PsycInfo, Web of Science and Cochrane CENTRAL from inception to 21/01/22, and unpublished studies and the grey literature. The proportion of penicillin allergic patients de-labelled and harmed was calculated using random effects models. FINDINGS: Overall, 5019 patients were de-labelled. Using allergy history alone, 14% (95% CI, 9.0-21%) of 4350 assessed patients were de-labelled without reported harm. Direct drug provocation testing resulted in de-labelling 27%; (95% CI, 18-37%) of 4207 assessed patients. Of 1373 tested, 98% were de-labelled (95% CI, 97-99%), harm, none serious, was reported in 1% (95% CI, 0-2%). Using skin testing followed by drug provocation testing de-labelled 41% (95% CI, 24-59%) of 2890 assessed patients. Of 1294 tested patients 95.0% (95% CI, 90%-99%) were de-labelled, reported harm was low.(0%; (95% CI 0%-1%). INTERPRETATION: PADL by non-allergists is efficacious and safe. The proportion of assessed patients who can be de-labelled increases with complexity of testing method, but substantial numbers can be de-labelled without skin testing. FUNDING: Source of funding: NIHR300542. Funder had no further role in the study

    Developing a behavioural intervention package to identify and amend incorrect penicillin allergy records in UK general practice and subsequently change antibiotic use

    Get PDF
    Objectives: To develop a behavioural intervention package to support clinicians and patients to amend incorrect penicillin allergy records in general practice. The intervention aimed to: (1) support clinicians to refer patients for penicillin allergy testing (PAT), (2) support patients to attend for PAT and (3) support clinicians and patients to prescribe or consume penicillin, when indicated, following a negative PAT result. Methods: Theory-based, evidence-based and person-based approaches were used in the intervention development. We used evidence from a rapid review, two qualitative studies, and expert consultations with the clinical research team to identify the intervention ‘guiding principles’ and develop an intervention plan. Barriers and facilitators to the target behaviours were mapped to behaviour change theory in order to describe the proposed mechanisms of change. In the final stage, think-aloud interviews were conducted to optimise intervention materials. Results: The collated evidence showed that the key barriers to referral of patients by clinicians were limited experience of referral and limited knowledge of referral criteria and PAT. Barriers for patients attending PAT were lack of knowledge of the benefits of testing and lack of motivation to get tested. The key barriers to the prescription and consumption of first-line penicillin following a negative test result were patient and clinician beliefs about the accuracy of PAT and whether taking penicillin was safe. Intervention materials were designed and developed to address these barriers. Conclusions: We present a novel behavioural intervention package designed to address the multiple barriers to uptake of PAT in general practice by clinicians and patients. The intervention development details how behaviour change techniques have been incorporated to hypothesise how the intervention is likely to work to help amend incorrect penicillin allergy records. The intervention will go on to be tested in a feasibility trial and randomised controlled trial in England

    Non-allergist healthcare workers views on delivering a penicillin allergy de-labelling inpatient pathway: identifying the barriers and enablers

    Get PDF
    Background Non-allergist delivered PADL is supported by UK and World Health Organization guidelines but is not yet routine in UK hospitals. Understanding the views of healthcare workers (HCWs) on managing patients with penA records and exploring perspectives on delivering a PADL inpatient pathway are required to inform the development of non-allergist delivered PADL pathways. Objective To explore the perspectives of non-allergist HCWs working in medical specialties on managing patients with penA records, and to explore the enablers and barriers to embedding PADL as a standard of care for inpatients. Methods Semi-structured interviews with doctors, nurses, pharmacists and medicines optimization pharmacy technicians working in a district general hospital in the UK. Thematic analysis was used to analyse the data. Results The PADL pathway was considered a shared responsibility of the multidisciplinary team, which needed to be structured and supported by a framework. PADL aligns with HCW roles but time to deliver PADL was a barrier. Training for HCWs on the benefits of PADL and delivering PADL for those patients where a penicillin might be beneficial during the current episode of care would both motivate HCWs to deliver PADL. Discussion and conclusion The PADL pathway was acceptable to HCWs and aligned with their roles and current healthcare processes but their capacity to deliver PADL in a time pressured environment was a significant barrier

    Point-of-care tests for infectious diseases: barriers to implementation across three London teaching hospitals.

    Get PDF
    Existing Point-of-care tests (POCT) to help identify infection-related causes of illness can complement diagnostic and disposition decisions in children attending emergency departments.(1) Evidence-based clinical algorithms can integrate such POCT to aid in the admission and discharge decision process. Paediatric studies validating these tools are scarce, with very few studies conducted in UK centres.(2-5) POCT can be based on host infection markers (e.g. finger prick tests for C-reactive protein (CRP) to help decide if the patient has a bacterial or viral infection) or pathogen detection tests (e.g. throat/nose swabs to rapidly diagnose viral infections such as RSV or influenza). This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved

    Awareness of appropriate antibiotic use in primary care for influenza-like illness: evidence of improvement from UK population-based surveys

    Get PDF
    Influenza-like illnesses (ILI) account for a significant portion of inappropriate antibiotic use. Patient expectations for antibiotics for ILI are likely to play a substantial role in ‘unnecessary’ antibiotic consumption. This study aimed to investigate trends in awareness of appropriate antibiotic use and antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Three sequential online surveys of independent representative samples of adults in the United Kingdom investigated expectations for, and consumption of, antibiotics for ILI (May/June 2015 (n = 2064); Oct/Nov 2016 (n = 4000); Mar 2017 (n = 4000)). Respondents were asked whether they thought antibiotics were effective for ILI and about their antibiotic use. Proportions and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for each question and interactions with respondent characteristics were tested using logistic regression. Over the three surveys, the proportion of respondents who believed antibiotics would “definitely/probably” help an ILI fell from 37% (95% CI 35–39%) to 28% (95% CI 26–29%). Those who would “definitely/probably” visit a doctor in this situation fell from 48% (95% CI 46–50%) to 36% (95% CI 34–37%), while those who would request antibiotics during a consultation fell from 39% (95% CI 37–41%) to 30% (95% CI 29–32%). The percentage of respondents who found the information we provided about AMR “new/surprising” fell from 34% (95% CI 32–36%) to 28% (95% CI 26–31%). Awareness improved more among black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) than white people, with little other evidence of differences in improvements between subgroups. Whilst a degree of selection bias is unavoidable in online survey samples, the results suggest that awareness of AMR and appropriate antibiotic use has recently significantly improved in the United Kingdom, according to a wide range of indicators

    Optimising antimicrobial stewardship interventions in English primary care: a behavioural analysis of qualitative and intervention studies

    Get PDF
    Objective: While various interventions have helped reduce antibiotic prescribing, further gains can be made. This study aimed to identify ways to optimise antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) interventions by assessing the extent to which important influences on antibiotic prescribing are addressed (or not) by behavioural content of AMS interventions. Settings: English primary care. Interventions: AMS interventions targeting healthcare professionals’ antibiotic prescribing for respiratory tract infections. Methods: We conducted two rapid reviews. The first included qualitative studies with healthcare professionals on self-reported influences on antibiotic prescribing. The influences were inductively coded and categorised using the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Prespecified criteria were used to identify key TDF domains. The second review included studies of AMS interventions. Data on effectiveness were extracted. Components of effective interventions were extracted and coded using the TDF, Behaviour Change Wheel and Behaviour Change Techniques (BCTs) taxonomy. Using prespecified matrices, we assessed the extent to which BCTs and intervention functions addressed the key TDF domains of influences on prescribing. Results: We identified 13 qualitative studies, 41 types of influences on antibiotic prescribing and 6 key TDF domains of influences: ‘beliefs about consequences’, ‘social influences’, ‘skills’, ‘environmental context and resources’, ‘intentions’ and ‘emotions’. We identified 17 research-tested AMS interventions; nine of them effective and four nationally implemented. Interventions addressed all six key TDF domains of influences. Four of these six key TDF domains were addressed by 50%–67% BCTs that were theoretically congruent with these domains, whereas TDF domain 'skills' was addressed by 24% of congruent BCTs and 'emotions' by none. Conclusions: Further improvement of antibiotic prescribing could be facilitated by: (1) national implementation of effective research-tested AMS interventions (eg, electronic decision support tools, training in interactive use of leaflets, point-of-care testing); (2) targeting important, less-addressed TDF domains (eg, 'skills', 'emotions'); (3) using relevant, under-used BCTs to target key TDF domains (eg, ‘forming/reversing habits’, ‘reducing negative emotions’, ‘social support’). These could be incorporated into existing, or developed as new, AMS interventions
    • 

    corecore