Quality indicators for the use of systemic antibiotics in dentistry.

BACKGROUND: Risks resulted from using systemic antibiotics such as increasing rates of bacterial resistance, allergy and side effects should be always weighed individually for each patient against any potential benefits. Routine antibiotic prescribing must be therefore discouraged. The Federal Joint Committee ("Gemeinsamer Bundesauschuss", G-BA) commissioned the AQUA-Institute with the development of an external quality assurance procedure, examining systemic antibiotic use in periodontal, conservative and surgical treatments in ambulatory dental health care. The aim of the procedure was to increase patient safety through rational use of systemic antibiotics and increasing the use of first line medications. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The process of developing the quality indicators included searching for relevant literature and quality indicators, analyzing dental claims data (2013) and antibiotic prescriptions, and finally evaluating the proposed quality indicators in an expert panel. The analysis examined patients who received dental treatments and a prescription for systemic antibiotics. The indicator set consisted of three indicators: usage of systemic antibiotics in dental treatments without indication for antibiotics, the percentage of penicillin prescriptions in dental treatments and the percentage of clindamycin prescriptions in dental treatments. RESULTS: The analysis showed that about 574 million claims on conservative and surgical treatments were made for about 60 million patients. In total, about 4.7 million systemic antibiotics prescriptions were issued for 3.5 million patients with dental treatments. The percentage of patients given a systemic antibiotic as an adjunct to dental treatments, usually without indication, was 3.4 %. The percentage of penicillin prescriptions (as a whole therapeutic/pharmacological subgroup) of the total systemic antibiotic use in dental treatments was 46.3 %; for clindamycin it was 47.0 %. CONCLUSION: Clindamycin is preferred by German dentists, and its overprescription represents an inappropriate use of antibiotics. Optimizing antibiotics prescriptions in dental care through rational use decreases bacterial resistance, increases patient safety and the overall quality of dental care. Future analysis and reporting of the indicators will draw a clear picture of dental antibiotic use, i.e. using a risk adjustment for the first indicator and the implementation of a consistent identification system for dentists in the statutory health insurance (SHI). This will enable a direct connection between dentists and their respective antibiotic prescriptions (causal relationship) and thus highlight areas of need for quality improvement. As such targeted educational activities can be developed on an individual basis.

Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of fissure sealants in children and adolescents with a high caries risk.

In Germany, the application of resin-based pits and fissures sealants on the occlusal surfaces of permanent molars is part of individual prophylaxis for children and adolescents between six and 18 years. The individual prophylaxis is covered by the Statutory Health Insurance since 1993. The report addresses questions on medical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, as well as ethical, social, and legal implications of pit and fissure sealants in preventing dental caries for children and adolescents at high caries risk. The results of the studies indicate a protective effect of pit and fissure sealants, particularly for children and adolescents at high caries risk. Additionally, the economic evaluation suggests a tendency for cost savings in this group. Nevertheless, a general expansion of the intervention cannot be recommended. All studies show a risk of bias in favour of pit and fissure sealing and a limited transferability to the German health care system. Studies included in the economic evaluation revealed methodological flaws. Both the economic models and primary studies do not provide reliable results.

A comparison of conventional and retrospective measures of change in symptoms after elective surgery.

BACKGROUND: Measuring change is fundamental to evaluations, health services research and quality management. To date, the Gold-Standard is the prospective assessment of pre- to postoperative change. However, this is not always possible (e.g. in emergencies). Instead a retrospective approach to the measurement of change is one alternative of potential validity. In this study, the Gold-Standard 'conventional' method was compared with two variations of the retrospective approach: a perceived-change design (model A) and a design that featured observed follow-up minus baseline recall (model B). METHODS: In a prospective longitudinal observational study of 185 hernia patients and 130 laparoscopic cholecystectomy patients (T0: 7-8 days pre-operative; T1: 14 days post-operative and T2: 6 months post-operative) changes in symptoms (Hernia: 9 Items, Cholecystectomy: 8 Items) were assessed at the three time points by patients and the conventional method was compared to the two alternatives. Comparisons were made regarding the percentage of missing values per questionnaire item, correlation between conventional and retrospective measurements, and the degree to which retrospective measures either over- or underestimated changes and time-dependent effects. RESULTS: Single item missing values in model A were more frequent than in model B (e.g. Hernia repair at T1: model A: 23.5%, model B: 7.9%. In all items and at both postoperative points of measurement, correlation of change between the conventional method and model B was higher than between the conventional method and model A. For both models A and B, correlation with the change calculated with the conventional method was higher at T1 than at T2. Compared to the conventional model both models A and B also overestimated symptom-change (i.e. improvement) with similar frequency, but the overestimation was higher in model A than in model B. In both models, overestimation was lower at T1 than at T2 and lower after hernia repair than after cholecystectomy. CONCLUSIONS: The retrospective method of measuring change was associated with a larger improvement in symptoms than was the conventional method. Retrospective assessment of change results in a more optimistic evaluation of improvement by patients than does the conventional method (at least for hernia repair and laparoscopic cholecystectomy).

Putting prevention into practice: qualitative study of factors that inhibit and promote preventive care by general practitioners, with a focus on elderly patients.

BACKGROUND: General practitioners (GPs) have a key role in providing preventive care, particularly for elderly patients. However, various factors can inhibit or promote the implementation of preventive care. In the present study, we identified and examined factors that inhibit and promote preventive care by German GPs, particularly for elderly patients, and assessed changes in physicians' attitudes toward preventive care throughout their careers. METHODS: A qualitative, explorative design was used to identify inhibitors and promoters of preventive care in German general medical practice. A total of 32 GPs in Berlin and Hannover were surveyed. Questions about factors that promote or inhibit implementation of preventive care and changes in physicians' perceptions of promoting and inhibiting factors throughout their careers were identified. Episodic interviews, which encouraged the reporting of anecdotes regarding daily knowledge and experiences, were analyzed using ATLAS/ti. Socio-demographic data of GPs and structural information about their offices were collected using short questionnaires. The factors identified as inhibitory or promoting were classified as being related to patients, physicians, or the healthcare system. The changes in GP attitudes toward preventive care throughout their careers were classified as personal transitions or as social and health policy transitions. RESULTS: Most of the identified barriers to preventive care were related to patients, such as a lack of motivation for making lifestyle changes and a lack of willingness to pay for preventive interventions. In addition, the healthcare system seemed to inadequately promote preventive care, mainly due to poor reimbursement for preventive care and fragmentation of care. GPs own attitudes and health habits seemed to influence the implementation of preventive care. GPs recognized their own lack of awareness of effective preventive interventions, particularly for elderly patients. GPs were motivated by positive preventive experiences, but often lacked the necessary training to counsel and support their patients. CONCLUSIONS: German GPs had positive attitudes towards prevention, but the implementation of preventive care was neither systematic nor continuous. Identification and elimination of barriers to preventive care is crucial. Further research is needed to identify effective practice-based approaches to overcome these barriers.