Has primary care antimicrobial use really been increasing? Comparison of changes in different prescribing measures for a complete geographic population 1995-2014

Objectives To elucidate how population trends in total antimicrobials dispensed in the community translate into individual exposure. Methods Retrospective, population-based observational study of all antimicrobial prescribing in a Scottish region in financial years 1995, 2000 and 2005–14. Analysis of temporal changes in all antimicrobials and specific antimicrobials measured in: WHO DDD per 1000 population; prescriptions per 1000 population; proportion of population with ≥1 prescription; mean number of prescriptions per person receiving any; mean DDD per prescription. Results Antimicrobial DDD increased between 1995 and 2014, from 5651 to 6987 per 1000 population [difference 1336 (95% CI 1309–1363)]. Prescriptions per 1000 fell (from 821 to 667, difference –154, –151 to –157), as did the proportion prescribed any antimicrobial [from 39.3% to 30.8% (–8.5, –8.4 to –8.6)]. Rising mean DDD per prescription, from 6.88 in 1995 to 10.47 in 2014 (3.59, 3.55–3.63), drove rising total DDD. In the under-5s, every measure fell over time (68.2% fall in DDD per 1000; 60.7% fall in prescriptions per 1000). Among 5–64 year olds, prescriptions per 1000 were lowest in 2014 but among older people, despite a reduction since 2010, the 2014 rate was still higher than in 2000. Trends in individual antimicrobials provide some explanation for overall trends. Conclusions Rising antimicrobial volumes up to 2011 were mainly due to rising DDD per prescription. Trends in dispensed drug volumes do not readily translate into information on individual exposure, which is more relevant for adverse consequences including emergence of resistance.PostprintPeer reviewe

How is leflunomide prescribed and used in Australia? analysis of prescribing and adverse effect reporting

Purpose To evaluate the use of leflunomide in the Australian community since introduction in 2000. Trends in adverse drug reaction (ADR) reporting were also studied. Methods Annual Australian prescription and dispensing statistics were analysed. Drug utilisation was estimated as defined daily doses (DDD)/1000 inhabitants/day. ADR data from the Therapeutic Goods Administration's Adverse Drug Reactions Advisory Committee (ADRAC) national monitoring system were compared with the World Health Organisation (WHO) Vigibase records. Results Leflunomide use in Australia (dispensing data) increased from 0.2 in 2000 to 0.4 DDD/1000 inhabitants/day in 2002. The same overall pattern was observed in the 'authority to prescribe' data. From 2000-2002, prescribing of the starter pack (3 x 100 mg loading dose plus 30 x 20 mg tablets) declined (down 74%); likewise for the 20mg (30 tablets) pack. Gradual increases were noted for the 10 mg (30 tablets) pack (up 40%). Approximately 135 reports, detailing about 370 individual ADR, were generated annually. Gastro-intestinal disorders predominated, accounting for 24% of reactions reported to ADRAC. Skin and appendages disorders constituted 14% of reported reactions. Deaths in leflunomide users were attributed to a combination of haematological and gastro-intestinal complications, but it was not possible to ascertain other medication usage or contributing factors. Trends observed with the ADRAC reports were consistent with the WHO database. Conclusions Leflunomide was the first registered DMARD in Australia in over a decade and its use has increased within the community. The ADR reports might have contributed to Australian rheumatologists gradually abandoning loading patients with high doses of leflunomide in favour of starting therapy at lower doses. Copyright (c) 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd

Evaluation of a tool to benchmark hospital antibiotic prescribing in the United Kingdom

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether Defined Daily Dose/Finished Consultant Episode (DDD/FCE) ratio is sensitive to changes in prescribing patterns and could be used as a prescribing indicator in hospitals. METHOD: The study comprised two phases. In phase 1 the weekly DDD/FCE ratios for two antibiotics were calculated and monitored in one acute NHS hospital before and after the implementation of prescribing guidelines, which impacted on the use of the antibiotics. In phase 2 data on the use of four antibiotics over one year was collected from fifty-eight medium to large acute hospitals in England, together with corresponding FCE data. DDD/FCE ratios for each antibiotic in each hospital were compared. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Whether the DDD/FCE ratio for two antibiotics changed in one hospital following the introduction of prescribing guidelines for these antibiotics. The variability in DDD/FCE ratio for two broad spectrum antibiotics compared to two narrow spectrum antibiotics across a number of acute hospitals in England. Results: In phase 1 the DDD/FCE ratios for the two antibiotics were lower post implementation of the guidelines indicating that the ratio was sensitive to changes in prescribing. In phase 2 the median DDD/FCE ratios of the two broad spectrum antibiotics from all fifty eight hospitals were much higher (0.126, and 0.265) than for the two narrow spectrum antibiotics (0.048, and 0.021), indicating higher use of the broad spectrum antibiotics. Furthermore, the variation in prescribing between the hospitals, as indicated by the inter-quartile range about the median, was greater for the two broad spectrum agents (0.201 and 0.193), than for the narrow spectrum agents (0.06, and 0.042), as was expected. CONCLUSION: The DDD/FCE ratio is sensitive to changes in prescribing and can reflect differences in the use of antibiotics between hospitals, after accounting for differences in activity. DDD/FCE ratio has the potential to be used to also account for differences in case mix between hospitals although further work is needed in this area.Raymond W. Fitzpatrick, Catherine M. C. Edward

The match between common antibiotics packaging and guidelines for their use in Australia

Objectives: To determine the potential for a source of surplus antibiotics in the community to come from the mismatch between the recommended duration of antibiotic treatment for common indications in primary care and that dictated by default pharmaceutical industry packaging