RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on community antibiotic prescribing and stewardship: a qualitative interview study with general practitioners in England
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2021.11.19.21266529
DO 10.1101/2021.11.19.21266529
A1 Borek, Aleksandra J.
A1 Maitland, Katherine
A1 McLeod, Monsey
A1 Campbell, Anne
A1 Hayhoe, Benedict
A1 Butler, Christopher C.
A1 Morrell, Liz
A1 Roope, Laurence
A1 Holmes, Alison
A1 Walker, A. Sarah
A1 Tonkin-Crine, Sarah
A1 the STEP-UP study team
YR 2021
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/11/19/2021.11.19.21266529.abstract
AB The COVID-19 pandemic has had a profound impact on the delivery of primary care services. We aimed to identify general practitioners’ (GPs’) perceptions and experiences of how the COVID-19 pandemic influenced antibiotic prescribing and antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) in general practice in England. Twenty-four semi-structured interviews were conducted with 18 GPs at two time-points: autumn 2020 (14 interviews) and spring 2021 (10 interviews). Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed thematically, taking a longitudinal approach. Participants reported a lower threshold for antibiotic prescribing (and fewer consultations) for respiratory infections and COVID-19 symptoms early in the pandemic, then returning to more usual (pre-pandemic) prescribing. They perceived less impact on antibiotic prescribing for urinary and skin infections. Participants perceived the changing ways of working and consulting (e.g., proportions of remote and in-person consultations), and the changing patient presentations and GP workload as influencing the fluctuations in antibiotic prescribing. This was compounded by decreased engagement with, and priority of, AMS due to COVID-19-related urgent priorities. Re-engagement with AMS is needed, e.g., through reviving antibiotic prescribing feedback and targets/incentives. While the pandemic disrupted the usual ways of working, it also produced opportunities, e.g., for re-organising ways of managing infections and AMS in the future.Competing Interest StatementB.H. works for eConsult, a provider of asynchronous consultations in primary, secondary, and urgent/emergency care. Other authors declare no conflict of interest.Funding StatementThis research was funded by the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) through the Antimicrobial Resistance Cross Council Initiative supported by the seven research councils in partnership with other funders (grant number: ES/P008232/1). It was also supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Protection Research Unit (HPRU) in Healthcare Associated Infections and Antimicrobial Resistance at the University of Oxford and Imperial College London in partnership with Public Health England, the NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, and the NIHR under the Applied Health Research (ARC) programme for North West London. The support of the funders is gratefully acknowledged. CCB, AH and ASW are NIHR Senior Investigators. The funders had no influence on the design of the study, data collection, analysis and interpretation of the findings. The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR, the Department of Health and Social Care or the National Institute for Health Protection (Public Health England). Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The study was conducted according to the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki. It was reviewed and approved by the University of Oxford Medical Sciences Inter-Divisional Research Ethics Committee (ref. R59812) and the NHS Health Research Authority (ref. 19/HRA/0434).I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesThe data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author. Additional data (quotes) supporting the findings are available in Supplementary Material 2.