Primary care clinicians' perceptions of antibiotic resistance: a multi-country qualitative interview study.

OBJECTIVES: To explore and compare primary care clinicians' perceptions of antibiotic resistance in relation to the management of community-acquired lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI) in contrasting European settings. METHODS: Qualitative interview study with 80 primary care clinicians in nine European countries. Data were subjected to a five-stage analytical framework approach (familiarization; developing a thematic framework from the interview questions and the themes emerging from the data; indexing; charting; and mapping to search for interpretations in the data). Preliminary analysis reports were sent to all network facilitators for validation. RESULTS: Most clinicians stated that antibiotic resistance was not a problem in their practice. Some recommended enhanced feedback about local resistance rates. Northern European respondents generally favoured using the narrowest-spectrum agent, motivated by containing resistance, whereas southern/eastern European respondents were more motivated by maximizing the potential of a rapid treatment effect and so justified empirical use of broad-spectrum antibiotics. Antibiotic treatment failure was ascribed largely to viral aetiology rather than resistant bacteria. Clinicians generally agreed that resistance will become more serious without enhanced antibiotic stewardship or new drug discovery. CONCLUSIONS: If current rates of antibiotic resistance are likely to result in important treatment failures, then provision of local resistance data is likely to enhance clinicians' sense of importance of the issue. Interventions to enhance the quality of antibiotic prescribing in primary care should address perceptions, particularly in the south and east of Europe, that possible advantages to patients from antibiotic treatment in general, and from newer broad-spectrum compared with narrow-spectrum agents, outweigh disadvantages to patients and society from associated effects on antibiotic resistance.

Understanding variation in primary medical care: a nine-country qualitative study of clinicians' accounts of the non-clinical factors that shape antibiotic prescribing decisions for lower respiratory tract infection.

OBJECTIVES: There is a wide variation between European countries in antibiotic prescribing for patients in primary care with lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI) that is not explained by case mix and clinical factors alone. Variation in antibiotic prescribing that is not warranted by differences in illness and clinical presentation may increase selection of resistant organisms, contributing to the problem of antibiotic resistance. This study aimed to investigate clinicians' accounts of non-clinical factors that influence their antibiotic prescribing decision for patients with LRTI, to understand variation and identify opportunities for addressing possible unhelpful variation. DESIGN: Multicountry qualitative semistructured interview study, with data subjected to a five-stage analytic framework approach (familiarisation, developing a thematic framework from interview questions and emerging themes, indexing, charting and interpretation), and with interviewers commenting on preliminary analytic themes. SETTING: Primary care. PARTICIPANTS: Eighty primary care clinicians randomly selected from primary care research networks based in nine European cities. RESULTS: Clinicians' accounts identified non-clinical factors imposed by the healthcare system operating within specific regional primary care research networks, including patient access to antibiotics before consulting a doctor (Barcelona and Milan), systems to reduce patient expectations for antibiotics (Southampton and Antwerp) and lack of consistent treatment guidelines (Balatonfüred and Lódz). Secondly, accounts revealed factors related to specific characteristics of clinicians regardless of network (professional ethos, self-belief in decision-making and commitment to shared decision-making). CONCLUSIONS: Addressing healthcare system factors (eg, limiting patients' self-management with antibiotics before consulting in primary care, increased public awareness and provision of more consistent guidelines) may assist in reducing unhelpful variation in antibiotic prescribing. Promoting clinicians' receptivity to change, confidence in decision-making and readiness to invest in explaining prescribing decisions may also be beneficial. As factors were emphasised differently between networks, local flexibility in interventions is likely to maximise effectiveness.

Clinical influences on antibiotic prescribing decisions for lower respiratory tract infection: a nine country qualitative study of variation in care.

OBJECTIVES: There is variation in antibiotic prescribing for lower respiratory tract infections (LRTI) in primary care that does not benefit patients. This study aims to investigate clinicians' accounts of clinical influences on antibiotic prescribing decisions for LRTI to better understand variation and identify opportunities for improvement. DESIGN: Multi country qualitative interview study. Semi-structured interviews using open-ended questions and a patient scenario. Data were subjected to five-stage analytic framework approach (familiarisation, developing a thematic framework from the interview questions and emerging themes, indexing, charting and mapping to search for interpretations), with interviewers commenting on preliminary reports. SETTING: Primary care. PARTICIPANTS: 80 primary care clinicians randomly selected from primary care research networks based in nine European cities. RESULTS: Clinicians reported four main individual clinical factors that guided their antibiotic prescribing decision: auscultation, fever, discoloured sputum and breathlessness. These were considered alongside a general impression of the patient derived from building a picture of the illness course, using intuition and familiarity with the patient. Comorbidity and older age were considered main risk factors for poor outcomes. Clinical factors were similar across networks, apart from C reactive protein near patient testing in Tromsø. Clinicians developed ways to handle diagnostic and management uncertainty through their own clinical routines. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians emphasised the importance of auscultation, fever, discoloured sputum and breathlessness, general impression of the illness course, familiarity with the patient, comorbidity, and age in informing their antibiotic prescribing decisions for LRTI. As some of these factors may be overemphasised given the evolving evidence base, greater standardisation of assessment and integration of findings may help reduce unhelpful variation in management. Non-clinical influences will also need to be addressed.