Best practice guidance for antibiotic audit and feedback interventions in primary care : a modified Delphi study from the Joint Programming Initiative on Antimicrobial resistance: Primary Care Antibiotic Audit and Feedback Network (JPIAMR-PAAN)
© 2023. Crown..
BACKGROUND: Primary care is a critical partner for antimicrobial stewardship efforts given its high human antibiotic usage. Peer comparison audit and feedback (A&F) is often used to reduce inappropriate antibiotic prescribing. The design and implementation of A&F may impact its effectiveness. There are no best practice guidelines for peer comparison A&F in antibiotic prescribing in primary care.
OBJECTIVE: To develop best practice guidelines for peer comparison A&F for antibiotic prescribing in primary care in high income countries by leveraging international expertise via the Joint Programming Initiative on Antimicrobial Resistance-Primary Care Antibiotic Audit and Feedback Network.
METHODS: We used a modified Delphi process to achieve convergence of expert opinions on best practice statements for peer comparison A&F based on existing evidence and theory. Three rounds were performed, each with online surveys and virtual meetings to enable discussion and rating of each best practice statement. A five-point Likert scale was used to rate consensus with a median threshold score of 4 to indicate a consensus statement.
RESULTS: The final set of guidelines include 13 best practice statements in four categories: general considerations (n = 3), selecting feedback recipients (n = 1), data and indicator selection (n = 4), and feedback delivery (n = 5).
CONCLUSION: We report an expert-derived best practice recommendations for designing and evaluating peer comparison A&F for antibiotic prescribing in primary care. These 13 statements can be used by A&F designers to optimize the impact of their quality improvement interventions, and improve antibiotic prescribing in primary care.
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
|---|
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2023 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2023 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:12 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
Antimicrobial resistance and infection control - 12(2023), 1 vom: 29. Juli, Seite 72 |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Schwartz, Kevin L [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
|---|
| Themen: |
Anti-Bacterial Agents |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
Date Completed 31.07.2023 Date Revised 10.08.2023 published: Electronic Citation Status MEDLINE |
|---|
| doi: |
10.1186/s13756-023-01279-z |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM360167551 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000naa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLM360167551 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20231226082432.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 231226s2023 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1186/s13756-023-01279-z |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n1200.xml |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLM360167551 | ||
| 035 | |a (NLM)37516892 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Schwartz, Kevin L |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Best practice guidance for antibiotic audit and feedback interventions in primary care |b a modified Delphi study from the Joint Programming Initiative on Antimicrobial resistance: Primary Care Antibiotic Audit and Feedback Network (JPIAMR-PAAN) |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2023 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ƒaComputermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a ƒa Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a Date Completed 31.07.2023 | ||
| 500 | |a Date Revised 10.08.2023 | ||
| 500 | |a published: Electronic | ||
| 500 | |a Citation Status MEDLINE | ||
| 520 | |a © 2023. Crown. | ||
| 520 | |a BACKGROUND: Primary care is a critical partner for antimicrobial stewardship efforts given its high human antibiotic usage. Peer comparison audit and feedback (A&F) is often used to reduce inappropriate antibiotic prescribing. The design and implementation of A&F may impact its effectiveness. There are no best practice guidelines for peer comparison A&F in antibiotic prescribing in primary care | ||
| 520 | |a OBJECTIVE: To develop best practice guidelines for peer comparison A&F for antibiotic prescribing in primary care in high income countries by leveraging international expertise via the Joint Programming Initiative on Antimicrobial Resistance-Primary Care Antibiotic Audit and Feedback Network | ||
| 520 | |a METHODS: We used a modified Delphi process to achieve convergence of expert opinions on best practice statements for peer comparison A&F based on existing evidence and theory. Three rounds were performed, each with online surveys and virtual meetings to enable discussion and rating of each best practice statement. A five-point Likert scale was used to rate consensus with a median threshold score of 4 to indicate a consensus statement | ||
| 520 | |a RESULTS: The final set of guidelines include 13 best practice statements in four categories: general considerations (n = 3), selecting feedback recipients (n = 1), data and indicator selection (n = 4), and feedback delivery (n = 5) | ||
| 520 | |a CONCLUSION: We report an expert-derived best practice recommendations for designing and evaluating peer comparison A&F for antibiotic prescribing in primary care. These 13 statements can be used by A&F designers to optimize the impact of their quality improvement interventions, and improve antibiotic prescribing in primary care | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Journal Article | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Anti-Bacterial Agents |2 NLM | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Xu, Alice X T |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Alderson, Sarah |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Bjerrum, Lars |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Brehaut, Jamie |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Brown, Benjamin C |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Bucher, Heiner C |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a De Sutter, An |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Francis, Nick |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Grimshaw, Jeremy |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Gunnarsson, Ronny |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Hoye, Sigurd |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Ivers, Noah |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Lecky, Donna M |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Lindbæk, Morten |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Linder, Jeffrey A |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Little, Paul |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Michalsen, Benedikte Olsen |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a O'Connor, Denise |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Pulcini, Celine |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Sundvall, Pär-Daniel |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Lundgren, Pia Touboul |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Verbakel, Jan Y |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Verheij, Theo J |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Antimicrobial resistance and infection control |d 2012 |g 12(2023), 1 vom: 29. Juli, Seite 72 |w (DE-627)NLM220841640 |x 2047-2994 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:12 |g year:2023 |g number:1 |g day:29 |g month:07 |g pages:72 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13756-023-01279-z |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 12 |j 2023 |e 1 |b 29 |c 07 |h 72 | ||