Patients with Sore Throat: A Survey of Self-Management and Healthcare-Seeking Behavior in 13 Countries Worldwide

Background: Acute sore throat is one of the most common problems for which patients consult their general practitioner and is a key area for inappropriate antibiotic prescribing. The objective of this study was to investigate patients' attitudes related to healthcare-seeking behavior and self-management of sore throat. Methods: We conducted an observational, questionnaire-based study across 13 countries (Australia, Brazil, China, France, Germany, Italy, the Philippines, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Thailand, the UK and the USA) on respondents who reported having had a sore throat in the previous 12 months. Data were collected on their experiences, contact with healthcare professionals, treatment practices and opinions about antibiotics. Results: A total of 5196 respondents (approximately 400 per country) completed the survey. Over 80% of respondents sought advice for a sore throat, with 30% consulting a general practitioner. The desire to limit the worsening of symptoms was the main reason for seeking treatment. Other reasons concerned resolving persistent symptoms and reducing the impact on daily life/sleep. Self-management for sore throat was mainly medicated sore throat remedies. "Wanting an antibiotic" was rated much lower (55%) than most other reasons for visiting a doctor, but this differed greatly between countries. The percentage of respondents using antibiotics varied widely, for example, 10% in the UK and 45% in Saudi Arabia. There was considerable variation in the proportion of respondents who thought that antibiotics would be effective against sore throat (from 24% in France to 94% in Saudi Arabia). Conclusions: Our findings suggest that knowledge of effective treatments for sore throat varied widely. The results of this study should enable healthcare professionals to better anticipate patients' needs. This will support healthcare professionals in their role as antibiotic stewards, helping to reduce the misuse of antibiotics, and further guiding patients towards symptomatic self-management of sore throat

The Opportunity of Point-of-Care Diagnostics in General Practice:Modelling the Effects on Antimicrobial Resistance

OBJECTIVES: Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a public health threat associated with antibiotic consumption. Community-acquired acute respiratory tract infections (CA-ARTIs) are a major driver of antibiotic consumption in primary care. We aimed to quantify the investments required for a large-scale rollout of point-of care (POC) diagnostic testing in Dutch primary care, and the impact on AMR due to reduced use of antibiotics. METHODS: We developed an individual-based model that simulates consultations for CA-ARTI at GP practices in the Netherlands and compared a scenario where GPs test all CA-ARTI patients with a hypothetical diagnostic strategy to continuing the current standard-of-care for the years 2020-2030. We estimated differences in costs and future AMR rates caused by testing all patients consulting for CA-ARTI with a hypothetical diagnostic strategy, compared to the current standard-of-care in GP practices. RESULTS: Compared to the current standard-of-care, the diagnostic algorithm increases the total costs of GP consultations for CA-ARTI by 9% and 19%, when priced at €5 and €10, respectively. The forecast increase in Streptococcus pneumoniae resistance against penicillins can be partly restrained by the hypothetical diagnostic strategy from 3.8 to 3.5% in 2030, albeit with considerable uncertainty. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that implementing a hypothetical diagnostic strategy for all CA-ARTI patients in primary care raises the costs of consultations, while lowering antibiotic consumption and AMR. Novel health-economic methods to assess and communicate the potential benefits related to AMR may be required for interventions with limited gains for individual patients, but considerable potential related to antibiotic consumption and AMR

Communication training for general practitioners aimed at improving antibiotic prescribing:A controlled before-after study in multicultural Dutch cities

Introduction: Suboptimal doctor-patient communication drives inappropriate prescribing of antibiotics. We evaluated a communication intervention for general practitioners (GPs) in multicultural Dutch cities to improve antibiotic prescribing for respiratory tract infections (RTI).Methods: This was a non-randomized controlled before-after study. The study period was pre-intervention November 2019 – April 2020 and post-intervention November 2021 – April 2022. The intervention consisted of a live training (organized between September and November 2021), an E-learning, and patient material on antibiotics and antibiotic resistance in multiple languages. The primary outcome was the absolute number of prescribed antibiotic courses indicated for RTIs per GP; the secondary outcome was all prescribed antibiotics per GP. We compared the post-intervention differences in the mean number of prescribed antibiotics between the intervention (N = 25) and the control group (N = 110) by using an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) test, while adjusting for the pre-intervention number of prescribed antibiotics. Additionally, intervention GPs rated the training and their knowledge and skills before the intervention and 3 months thereafter.Results: There was no statistically significant difference in the mean number of prescribed antibiotics for RTI between the intervention and the control group, nor for mean number of overall prescribed antibiotics. The intervention GPs rated the usefulness of the training for daily practice a 7.3 (on a scale from 1–10) and there was a statistically significant difference between pre- and post-intervention on four out of nine items related to knowledge and skills.Discussion:There was no change in GPs prescription behavior between the intervention and control group. However, GPs found the intervention useful and showed some improvement on self-rated knowledge and communication skills

Communication training for general practitioners aimed at improving antibiotic prescribing:A controlled before-after study in multicultural Dutch cities

Introduction: Suboptimal doctor-patient communication drives inappropriate prescribing of antibiotics. We evaluated a communication intervention for general practitioners (GPs) in multicultural Dutch cities to improve antibiotic prescribing for respiratory tract infections (RTI).Methods: This was a non-randomized controlled before-after study. The study period was pre-intervention November 2019 – April 2020 and post-intervention November 2021 – April 2022. The intervention consisted of a live training (organized between September and November 2021), an E-learning, and patient material on antibiotics and antibiotic resistance in multiple languages. The primary outcome was the absolute number of prescribed antibiotic courses indicated for RTIs per GP; the secondary outcome was all prescribed antibiotics per GP. We compared the post-intervention differences in the mean number of prescribed antibiotics between the intervention (N = 25) and the control group (N = 110) by using an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) test, while adjusting for the pre-intervention number of prescribed antibiotics. Additionally, intervention GPs rated the training and their knowledge and skills before the intervention and 3 months thereafter.Results: There was no statistically significant difference in the mean number of prescribed antibiotics for RTI between the intervention and the control group, nor for mean number of overall prescribed antibiotics. The intervention GPs rated the usefulness of the training for daily practice a 7.3 (on a scale from 1–10) and there was a statistically significant difference between pre- and post-intervention on four out of nine items related to knowledge and skills.Discussion:There was no change in GPs prescription behavior between the intervention and control group. However, GPs found the intervention useful and showed some improvement on self-rated knowledge and communication skills

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Antibiotic Prescribing for Common Infections in The Netherlands: A Primary Care-Based Observational Cohort Study

In 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic brought dramatic changes in the delivery of primary health care across the world, presumably changing the number of consultations for infectious diseases and antibiotic use. We aimed to assess the impact of the pandemic on infections and antibiotic prescribing in Dutch primary care. All patients included in the routine health care database of the Julius General Practitioners' Network were followed from March through May 2019 (n = 389,708) and March through May 2020 (n = 405,688). We extracted data on consultations for respiratory/ear, urinary tract, gastrointestinal and skin infections using the International Classification of Primary Care (ICPC) codes. These consultations were combined in disease episodes and linked to antibiotic prescriptions. The numbers of infectious disease episodes (total and those treated with antibiotics), complications, and antibiotic prescription rates (i.e., proportion of episodes treated with antibiotics) were calculated and compared between the study periods in 2019 and 2020. Fewer episodes were observed during the pandemic months than in the same months in 2019 for both the four infectious disease entities and complications such as pneumonia, mastoiditis and pyelonephritis. The largest decline was seen for gastrointestinal infections (relative risk (RR), 0.54; confidence interval (CI), 0.51 to 0.58) and skin infections (RR, 0.71; CI, 0.67 to 0.75). The number of episodes treated with antibiotics declined as well, with the largest decrease seen for respiratory/ear infections (RR, 0.54; CI, 0.52 to 0.58). The antibiotic prescription rate for respiratory/ear infections declined from 21% to 13% (difference -8.0% (CI, -8.8 to -7.2)), yet the prescription rates for other infectious disease entities remained similar or increased slightly. The decreases in primary care infectious disease episodes and antibiotic use were most pronounced in weeks 15-19, mid-COVID-19 wave, after an initial peak in respiratory/ear infection presentation in week 11, the first week of lock-down. In conclusion, our findings indicate that the COVID-19 pandemic has had profound effects on the presentation of infectious disease episodes and antibiotic use in primary care in the Netherlands. Consequently, the number of infectious disease episodes treated with antibiotics decreased. We found no evidence of an increase in complications

Common infections and antibiotic prescribing during the first year of the covid-19 pandemic: A primary care-based observational cohort study

Presentation and antibiotic prescribing for common infectious disease episodes decreased substantially during the first COVID-19 pandemic wave in Dutch general practice. We set out to determine the course of these variables during the first pandemic year. We conducted a retrospective observational cohort study using routine health care data from the Julius General Practitioners’ Network. All patients registered in the pre-pandemic year (n = 425,129) and/or during the first pandemic year (n = 432,122) were included. Relative risks for the number of infectious disease episodes (respiratory tract/ear, urinary tract, gastrointestinal, and skin), in total and those treated with antibiotics, and proportions of episodes treated with antibiotics (prescription rates) were calculated. Compared to the pre-pandemic year, primary care presentation for common infections remained lower during the full first pandemic year (RR, 0.77; CI, 0.76–0.78), mainly attributed to a sustained decline in respiratory tract/ear and gastrointestinal infection episodes. Presentation for urinary tract and skin infection episodes declined during the first wave, but returned to pre-pandemic levels during the second and start of the third wave. Antibiotic prescription rates were lower during the full first pandemic year (24%) as compared to the pre-pandemic year (28%), mainly attributed to a 10% lower prescription rate for respiratory tract/ear infections; the latter was not accompanied by an increase in complications. The decline in primary care presentation for common infections during the full first COVID-19 pandemic year, together with lower prescription rates for respiratory tract/ear infections, resulted in a substantial reduction in antibiotic prescribing in Dutch primary care

A Strong Decline in the Incidence of Childhood Otitis Media During the COVID-19 Pandemic in the Netherlands

Introduction: Recent reports have highlighted the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the incidence of infectious disease illnesses and antibiotic use. This study investigates the effect of the pandemic on childhood incidence of otitis media (OM) and associated antibiotic prescribing in a large primary care-based cohort in the Netherlands. Material and Methods: Retrospective observational cohort study using routine health care data from the Julius General Practitioners’ Network (JGPN). All children aged 0-12 registered in 62 practices before the COVID-19 pandemic (1 March 2019 - 29 February 2020) and/or during the pandemic (1 March 2020 - 28 February 2021) were included. Data on acute otitis media (AOM), otitis media with effusion (OME), ear discharge episodes and associated antibiotic prescriptions were extracted. Incidence rates per 1,000 child years (IR), incidence rate ratios (IRR) and incidence rate differences (IRD) were compared between the two study periods. Results: OM episodes declined considerably during the COVID-19 pandemic: IR pre-COVID-19 vs COVID-19 for AOM 73.7 vs 27.1 [IRR 0.37]; for OME 9.6 vs 4.1 [IRR 0.43]; and for ear discharge 12.6 vs 5.8 [IRR 0.46]. The absolute number of AOM episodes in which oral antibiotics were prescribed declined accordingly (IRD pre-COVID-19 vs COVID-19: -22.4 per 1,000 child years), but the proportion of AOM episodes with antibiotic prescription was similar in both periods (47% vs 46%, respectively). Discussion: GP consultation for AOM, OME and ear discharge declined by 63%, 57% and 54% respectively in the Netherlands during the COVID-19 pandemic. Similar antibiotic prescription rates before and during the pandemic indicate that the case-mix presenting to primary care did not considerably change. Our data therefore suggest a true decline as a consequence of infection control measures introduced during the pandemic

Did aetiology matter in illness duration and complications in patients presenting in primary care with acute respiratory tract infections early in the COVID-19 pandemic: An observational study in nine countries

BACKGROUND: Despite considerable research into COVID-19 sequelae, little is known about differences in illness duration and complications in patients presenting in primary care with symptoms of acute respiratory tract infections (RTI) that are and are not attributed to SARS-CoV-2 infection. OBJECTIVE: To explore whether aetiology impacted course of illness and prediction of complications in patients presenting in primary care with symptoms of RTI early in the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Between April 2020-March 2021 general practitioners from nine European countries recruited consecutively contacting patients with RTI symptoms. At baseline, an oropharyngeal-nasal swab was obtained for aetiology determination using PCR after follow-up of 28 days. Time to self-reported recovery was analysed with Kaplan-Meier curves. Predictors (baseline variables of demographics, patient and disease characteristics) of a complicated course (composite of hospital admission and persisting signs/symptoms at 28 days follow-up) were explored with logistic regression modelling. RESULTS: Of 855 patients with RTI symptoms, 237 (27.7%) tested SARS-CoV-2 positive. The proportion not feeling fully recovered (15.6% vs 18.1%, p  = 0.39), reporting being extremely tired (9.7% vs 12.8%, p  = 0.21), and not having returned to usual daily activities (18.1% vs 14.4%, p  = 0.18) at day 28 were comparable between SARS-CoV-2 positive ( n  = 237) and negative ( n  = 618) groups. However, among those feeling fully recovered (SARS-CoV-2 positive: 200 patients, SARS-CoV-2 negative: 506 patients), time to full recovery was significantly longer in SARS-CoV-2 patients (10.6 vs 7.7 days, p  < 0.001). We found no evidence that predictors of a complicated course differed between groups ( p  = 0.07). CONCLUSION: Early in the pandemic, the proportion of patients not feeling fully recovered by 28 days was similar between SARS-CoV-2 positive and negative patients presenting in primary care with RTI symptoms, but it took somewhat longer for SARS-CoV-2 patients to feel fully recovered. More research is needed on predictors of a complicated course in RTI

Clinical diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection: An observational study of respiratory tract infection in primary care in the early phase of the pandemic

BACKGROUND: Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, GPs had to distinguish SARS-CoV-2 from other aetiologies in patients presenting with respiratory tract infection (RTI) symptoms on clinical grounds and adapt management accordingly. OBJECTIVES: To test the diagnostic accuracy of GPs' clinical diagnosis of a SARS-CoV-2 infection in a period when COVID-19 was a new disease. To describe GPs' management of patients presenting with RTI for whom no confirmed diagnosis was available. To investigate associations between patient and clinical features with a SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: In April 2020-March 2021, 876 patients (9 countries) were recruited when they contacted their GP with symptoms of an RTI of unknown aetiology. A swab was taken at baseline for later analysis. Aetiology (PCR), diagnostic accuracy of GPs' clinical SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis, and patient management were explored. Factors related to SARS-CoV-2 infection were determined by logistic regression modelling. RESULTS: GPs suspected SARS-CoV-2 in 53% of patients whereas 27% of patients tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. True-positive patients (23%) were more intensively managed for follow-up, antiviral prescribing and advice than true-negatives (42%). False negatives (5%) were under-advised, particularly for social distancing and isolation. Older age (OR: 1.02 (1.01-1.03)), male sex (OR: 1.68 (1.16-2.41)), loss of taste/smell (OR: 5.8 (3.7-9)), fever (OR: 1.9 (1.3-2.8)), muscle aches (OR: 2.1 (1.5-3)), and a known risk factor for COVID-19 (travel, health care worker, contact with proven case; OR: 2.7 (1.8-4)) were predictive of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Absence of loss of taste/smell, fever, muscle aches and a known risk factor for COVID-19 correctly excluded SARS-CoV-2 in 92.3% of patients, whereas presence of 3, or 4 of these variables correctly classified SARS-CoV-2 in 57.7% and 87.1%. CONCLUSION: Correct clinical diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection, without POC-testing available, appeared to be complicated