Exploring the research needs, barriers and facilitators to the collection of biological data in adolescence for mental health research: a scoping review protocol paper.

INTRODUCTION: While research into adolescent mental health has developed a considerable understanding of environmental and psychosocial risk factors, equivalent biological evidence is lacking and is not representative of economic, social and ethnic diversity in the adolescent population. It is important to understand the possible barriers and facilitators to conduct this research. This will then allow us to improve our understanding of how biology interacts with environmental and psychosocial risk factors during adolescence. The objective of this scoping review is to identify and understand the needs, barriers and facilitators related to the collection of biological data in adolescent mental health research. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Reviewers will conduct a systematic search of PubMed, Medline, Scopus, Cochrane, ERIC, EMBASE, ProQuest, EBSCO Global Health electronic databases, relevant publications and reference lists to identify studies published in the English language at any time. This scoping review will identify published studies exploring mental health/psychopathology outcomes, with biological measures, in participants between the ages of 11 and 18 and examine the reported methodology used for data collection. Data will be summarised in tabular form with narrative synthesis and will use the methodology of Levac et al, supplemented by subsequent recommendations from the Joanna Briggs Institute Scoping Review Methodology. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required for this scoping review. The scoping review will be conducted with input from patient and public involvement, specifically including young people involved in our study ('Co-producing a framework of guiding principles for Engaging representative and diverse cohorts of young peopLE in Biological ReseArch in menTal hEalth'-www.celebrateproject.co.uk) Youth Expert Working Group. Dissemination will include publication in peer-reviewed journals, academic presentations and on the project website.

A single center observational study on emergency department clinician non-adherence to clinical practice guidelines for treatment of uncomplicated urinary tract infections.

BACKGROUND: The Emergency Department (ED) is a frequent site of antibiotic use; poor adherence with evidence-based guidelines and broad-spectrum antibiotic overuse is common. Our objective was to determine rates and predictors of inappropriate antimicrobial use in patients with uncomplicated urinary tract infections (UTI) compared to the 2010 International Clinical Practice Guidelines (ICPG). METHODS: A single center, prospective, observational study of patients with uncomplicated UTI presenting to an urban ED between September 2012 and February 2014 that examined ED physician adherence to ICPG when treating uncomplicated UTIs. Clinician-directed antibiotic treatment was compared to the ICPG using a standardized case definition for non-adherence. Binomial confidence intervals and student's t-tests were performed to evaluate differences in demographic characteristics and management between patients with pyelonephritis versus cystitis. Regression models were used to analyze the significance of various predictors to non-adherent treatment. RESULTS: 103 cases met the inclusion and exclusion criteria, with 63.1 % receiving non-adherent treatment, most commonly use of a fluoroquinolone (FQ) in cases with cystitis (97.6 %). In cases with pyelonephritis, inappropriate antibiotic choice (39.1 %) and no initial IV antibiotic for pyelonephritis (39.1 %) where recommended were the most common characterizations of non-adherence. Overall, cases of cystitis were no more/less likely to receive non-adherent treatment than cases of pyelonephritis (OR 0.9, 95 % confidence interval 0.4-2.2, P = 0.90). In multivariable analysis, patients more likely to receive non-adherent treatment included those without a recent history of a UTI (OR 3.8, 95 % CI 1.3-11.4, P = 0.02) and cystitis cases with back or abdominal pain only (OR 11.4, 95 % CI 2.1-63.0, P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with cystitis with back or abdominal pain only were most likely to receive non-adherent treatment, potentially suggesting diagnostic inaccuracy. Physician education on evidence-based guidelines regarding the treatment of uncomplicated UTI will decrease broad-spectrum use and drug resistance in uropathogens.

Benzodiazepine Prescribing in Older Adults in U.S. Ambulatory Clinics and Emergency Departments (2001-10).

OBJECTIVES: To assess trends in benzodiazepine use from 2001 to 2010 in older adults in U.S. ambulatory clinics and emergency departments (EDs). DESIGN: Retrospective analysis. SETTING: 2001 to 2010 National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS) and National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NHAMCS). PARTICIPANTS: Individuals aged 65 and older for whom the reason for visit might prompt a physician to use a benzodiazepine (e.g., anxiety, detoxification, back sprain). MEASUREMENTS: The NAMCS and NHAMCS were used to evaluate U.S. ambulatory clinic and ED visits. Encounters involving individuals aged 65 and older for whom a benzodiazepine might be prescribed were analyzed. Trends in benzodiazepine use in these visits were explored, and predictors of use were assessed using survey-weighted chi-square tests and logistic regression. RESULTS: From 2001 to 2010, benzodiazepines were used in 16.6 million of 133.3 million ambulatory clinic visits and 1.9 million of 18.1 million ED visits with the selected reasons for the visits. There was no change in benzodiazepine use in either setting over the study period, although benzodiazepine use for those aged 85 and older increased from 8.9% to 19.3% in ambulatory clinics and 10.1% to 17.2% in EDs. Individuals visiting clinics with anxiety were five times as likely to receive benzodiazepines (odds ratio (OR) = 4.8), and those in EDs were twice as likely (OR = 2.3). CONCLUSION: Despite safety concerns, benzodiazepine use in older adults in U.S. ambulatory clinics and EDs did not change from 2001 to 2010. In the oldest individuals, who are at higher risk of adverse events, a greater increase was seen than in those aged 65 to 84. Additional measures may be needed to promote alternatives to benzodiazepines.

A Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Use of Rapid Molecular Testing for Staphylococcus aureus for Patients With Cutaneous Abscesses in the Emergency Department With Standard of Care.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether real-time availability of rapid molecular results of Staphylococcus aureus would impact emergency department clinician antimicrobial selection for adults with cutaneous abscesses. DESIGN: We performed a prospective, randomized controlled trial comparing a rapid molecular test with standard of care culture-based testing. Follow-up telephone calls were made at between 2 and 7 days, 1 month, and 3 months after discharge. SETTING: Two urban, academic emergency departments. PATIENTS: Patients at least 18 years old presenting with a chief complaint of abscess, cellulitis, or insect bite and receiving incision and drainage were eligible. Seven hundred seventy-eight people were assessed for eligibility and 252 met eligibility criteria. METHODS: Clinician antibiotic selection and clinical outcomes were evaluated. An ad hoc outcome of test performance was performed. RESULTS: We enrolled 252 patients and 126 were randomized to receive the rapid test. Methicillin-susceptible S. aureus-positive patients receiving rapid test results were prescribed beta-lactams more often than controls (absolute difference, 14.5% [95% CI, 1.1%-30.1%]) whereas methicillin-resistant S. aureus-positive patients receiving rapid test results were more often prescribed anti-methicillin-resistant S. aureus antibiotics (absolute difference, 21.5% [95% CI, 10.1%-33.0%]). There were no significant differences between the 2 groups in 1-week or 3-month clinical outcomes. CONCLUSION: Availability of rapid molecular test results after incision and drainage was associated with more-targeted antibiotic selection. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01523899.

Multisite exploration of clinical decision making for antibiotic use by emergency medicine providers using quantitative and qualitative methods.

OBJECTIVES: To explore current practices and decision making regarding antimicrobial prescribing among emergency department (ED) clinical providers. METHODS: We conducted a survey of ED providers recruited from 8 sites in 3 cities. Using purposeful sampling, we then recruited 21 providers for in-depth interviews. Additionally, we observed 10 patient-provider interactions at one of the ED sites. SAS 9.3 was used for descriptive and predictive statistics. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using a thematic, constructivist approach with consensus coding using NVivo 10.0. Field and interview notes collected during the observational study were aligned with themes identified through individual interviews. RESULTS: Of 150 survey respondents, 76% agreed or strongly agreed that antibiotics are overused in the ED, while half believed they personally did not overprescribe. Eighty-nine percent used a smartphone or tablet in the ED for antibiotic prescribing decisions. Several significant differences were found between attending and resident physicians. Interview analysis identified 42 codes aggregated into the following themes: (1) resource and environmental factors that affect care; (2) access to and quality of care received outside of the ED consult; (3) patient-provider relationships; (4) clinical inertia; and (5) local knowledge generation. The observational study revealed limited patient understanding of antibiotic use. Providers relied heavily upon diagnostics and provided limited education to patients. Most patients denied a priori expectations of being prescribed antibiotics. CONCLUSIONS: Patient, provider, and healthcare system factors should be considered when designing interventions to improve antimicrobial stewardship in the ED setting.