Three Years of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic in a European Region: A Population-Based Longitudinal Assessment in Madrid Between 2020 and 2022.

Background: Our objective was to assess the health impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) during 2020-2022 in the Madrid region. Methods: We included all individuals registered in the Madrid Health System Registry as of 31 December 2019, and followed them until 31 December 2022. Using a unique personal identifier, we linked the databases of primary care, hospitals, pharmacies, certified laboratories performing diagnostic tests, vaccines, and mortality. Results: Of 6 833 423 individuals, 21.4% had a confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis, and 1.5% had a COVID-19 hospitalization (primary diagnosis). Thirty-day mortality was 1.6% for confirmed COVID-19 (from 11.4% in first semester 2020 to 0.4% in first semester 2022). Thirty-day mortality was 10.8% for COVID-19 hospitalizations (from 14.0% in first semester 2020 to 6.0% in second semester 2022). There were 24 073 deaths within 30 days of a confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis. Advanced age, male sex, higher socioeconomic deprivation, and comorbidities were associated with higher mortality. Conclusions: By linking administrative and clinical databases, we characterized the burden of the COVID-19 pandemic in Madrid over 3 years. Our analysis proposes a high-level framework for comparisons of the burden of COVID-19 across areas worldwide.

Clinical effectiveness and bacteriological eradication of three different Short-COurse antibiotic regimens and single-dose fosfomycin for uncomplicated lower Urinary Tract infections in adult women (SCOUT study): study protocol for a randomised clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: Uncomplicated lower urinary tract infections (uLUTI) are a common problem in primary care. Current local guidelines recommend the use of a single 3 g dose of fosfomycin. However, most general practitioners (GP) prefer short-course therapies to single-dose therapy. No study has compared head-to-head short-course antimicrobial agents for uLUTIs. Therefore, the aim of this randomised clinical trial is to compare three different short-course antibiotic therapies with a single-dose of fosfomycin for these infections. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This will be a pragmatic, multicentre, parallel group, open trial. Women aged 18 or older and with symptoms of uLUTI and a positive urine dipstick analysis will be randomised to one of the following four groups: a single dose of 3 g of fosfomycin, 2 days of 3 g of fosfomycin o.d., 3 days of pivmecillinam 400 mg three times per day (t.i.d) or 5 days of nitrofurantoin 100 mg t.i.d. A total sample of 1120 patients was calculated. The primary endpoint is clinical effectiveness at day 7, defined as cure of symptoms reported by the patients in a diary including four symptoms: dysuria, urgency, frequency and suprapubic pain, which will be scored on a 4-point severity scale (not present/mild/moderate/severe). Follow-up visits are scheduled at days 7 (phone call), 14 and 28 for assessing evolution. Urine samples will be collected in the three on-site visits and urine cultures performed. If positive, antibiograms for the three antibiotics studied will be performed. Bacterial eradication will be measured at days 14 and 28. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was approved by the Ethical Board of IDIAP Jordi Gol (reference number: 21/173-AC) and Spanish Agency of Medicines and Medical Devices. The findings of this trial will be disseminated through research conferences and peer-review journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04959331; EudraCT Number: 2021-001332-26. TIME SCHEDULE: January 2022 to April 2023.

Long-term impact of an intervention on rapid antigen detection tests in acute pharyngitis / Impacto de una intervención a largo plazo del uso de una prueba antigénica rápida en la faringitis aguda

OBJECTIVE: This study was aimed at evaluating the appropriateness of use and interpretation of rapid antigen detection testing (RADT) and antibiotic prescribing for acute pharyngitis six years after a multifaceted intervention. DESIGN: Before-and-after audit-based study. LOCATION: Primary care centres in eight autonomous Communities. PARTICIPANTS: General practitioners (GP) who had participated in the HAPPY AUDIT intervention study in 2008 and 2009 were invited to participate in a third audit-based study six years later (2015). METHOD: RADTs were provided to the participating practices and the GPs were requested to consecutively register all adults with acute pharyngitis. A registration form specifically designed for this study was used. RESULTS: A total of 121 GPs out of the 210 who participated in the first two audits agreed to participate in the third audit (57.6%). They registered 3394 episodes of pharyngitis in the three registrations. RADTs were used in 51.7% of all the cases immediately after the intervention, and in 49.4% six years later. Antibiotics were prescribed in 21.3% and 36.1%, respectively (P < .001), mainly when tonsillar exudates were present, and in 5.3% and 19.2% of those with negative RADT results (P < .001). On adjustment for covariables, compared to the antibiotic prescription observed just after the intervention, significantly more antibiotics were prescribed six years later (odds ratio: 2.24, 95% confidence interval: 1.73-2.89). CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that that the long-term impact of a multifaceted intervention, focusing on the use and interpretation of RADT in patients with acute pharyngitis, is reducing

OBJETIVO: Evaluar la adecuación del uso e interpretación de las técnicas antigénicas rápidas (TAR) y la prescripción antibiótica en la faringitis aguda 6 años después de haber realizado una intervención multifacética. DISEÑO: Estudio antes-después basado en una auditoria. EMPLAZAMIENTO: Centros de salud en 8 comunidades autónomas. PARTICIPANTES: Se invitaron a médicos de familia (MF) que ya habían participado en el estudio de intervención HAPPY AUDIT en 2008 y 2009 a un nuevo AUDIT 6 años después (2015). MÉTODO: Se proporcionaron TAR a los centros participantes, y se pidió a los MF que registraran consecutivamente a todos los adultos con faringitis aguda. Usamos un registro diseñado específicamente para este estudio. RESULTADOS: Ciento veintiuno MF de los 210 que participaron en los primeros registros (57,6%) aceptaron a participar en el tercer registro. Se registraron 3.394 episodios de faringitis agudas en las 3 auditorías. Se usaron TAR en el 51,7% de los casos inmediatamente después de la intervención y en el 49,4%, 6 años después. Se prescribieron antibióticos en el 21,3%y 36,1%, respectivamente (p < 0,001), principalmente cuando había exudado amigdalar y en el 5,3 y 19,2% de los resultados de TAR negativos (p < 0,001). Después de ajustar por las distintas covariables, comparado con la prescripción antibiótica observada justo después de la intervención, prescribieron significativamente más antibióticos 6 años más tarde (odds ratio: 2,24 [IC 95%: 1,73-2,89]). CONCLUSIONES: Este estudio muestra que se reduce el impacto de una intervención multifacética a largo plazo enfocada al uso e interpretación de TAR en pacientes con faringitis aguda

Long-term impact of an intervention on rapid antigen detection tests in acute pharyngitis.

OBJECTIVE: This study was aimed at evaluating the appropriateness of use and interpretation of rapid antigen detection testing (RADT) and antibiotic prescribing for acute pharyngitis six years after a multifaceted intervention. DESIGN: Before-and-after audit-based study. LOCATION: Primary care centres in eight autonomous Communities. PARTICIPANTS: General practitioners (GP) who had participated in the HAPPY AUDIT intervention study in 2008 and 2009 were invited to participate in a third audit-based study six years later (2015). METHOD: RADTs were provided to the participating practices and the GPs were requested to consecutively register all adults with acute pharyngitis. A registration form specifically designed for this study was used. RESULTS: A total of 121 GPs out of the 210 who participated in the first two audits agreed to participate in the third audit (57.6%). They registered 3394 episodes of pharyngitis in the three registrations. RADTs were used in 51.7% of all the cases immediately after the intervention, and in 49.4% six years later. Antibiotics were prescribed in 21.3% and 36.1%, respectively (P<.001), mainly when tonsillar exudates were present, and in 5.3% and 19.2% of those with negative RADT results (P<.001). On adjustment for covariables, compared to the antibiotic prescription observed just after the intervention, significantly more antibiotics were prescribed six years later (odds ratio: 2.24, 95% confidence interval: 1.73-2.89). CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that that the long-term impact of a multifaceted intervention, focusing on the use and interpretation of RADT in patients with acute pharyngitis, is reducing.

Use of point-of-care tests and antibiotic prescribing in sore throat and lower respiratory infections by general practitioners / Uso de pruebas de diagnóstico rápido y prescripción antibiótica en la faringitis y las infecciones del trato respiratorio inferior por parte de los médicos de atención primaria

INTRODUCTION: This study was aimed at assessing general practitioners' (GP) reliance on patient history, examination findings and the influence of the utilisation of point-of-care tests (POCT) in antibiotic prescribing for sore throat and lower respiratory tract infections (LRTI). METHODS: Audit-based study carried out in 2015. A group of GPs received an intervention six years earlier with provision of POCTs and another group of GPs acted as controls. Odds ratios for clinical variables predicting antibiotic prescribing were calculated by logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: A total of 238 GPs included 1906 patients with sore throat and 1970 LRTIs. A negative POCT result was negatively associated with antibiotic prescribing, with odds ratios ranging from 0.09 to 0.23. GPs using POCTs attached less weight to clinical criteria. CONCLUSION: GPs using rapid tests are mainly influenced by POCT results in the decision to prescribe antibiotics. However, antibiotic prescribing is still observed with negative POCT results

INTRODUCCIÓN: El objetivo fue evaluar la influencia de la historia clínica, exploración y uso de pruebas de diagnóstico rápido (PDR) por los médicos de familia (MF) en la prescripción antibiótica en la faringitis e infecciones del tracto respiratorio inferior (ITRI). MÉTODOS: Estudio de auditoría realizado en 2015. Un grupo de MF recibió una intervención 6 años antes con provisión de PDR y otro grupo de médicos actuó como control. Se calcularon odds ratios de predicción de prescripción antibiótica para las variables clínicas mediante análisis de regresión logística. RESULTADOS: Un total de 238 MF incluyeron 1.906 faringitis y 1.970 ITRI. Un resultado negativo de PDR se asoció negativamente con prescripción antibiótica, con odds ratios entre 0,09 y 0,23. Los médicos asignaron menos peso a los criterios clínicos cuando usaron PDR. CONCLUSIÓN: Los MF que usan PRD dan más importancia a sus resultados a la hora de prescribir antibióticos. Sin embargo, aún sigue observándose prescripción antibiótica con resultados negativos de las PDR

Use of point-of-care tests and antibiotic prescribing in sore throat and lower respiratory infections by general practitioners.

INTRODUCTION: This study was aimed at assessing general practitioners' (GP) reliance on patient history, examination findings and the influence of the utilisation of point-of-care tests (POCT) in antibiotic prescribing for sore throat and lower respiratory tract infections (LRTI). METHODS: Audit-based study carried out in 2015. A group of GPs received an intervention six years earlier with provision of POCTs and another group of GPs acted as controls. Odds ratios for clinical variables predicting antibiotic prescribing were calculated by logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: A total of 238 GPs included 1906 patients with sore throat and 1970 LRTIs. A negative POCT result was negatively associated with antibiotic prescribing, with odds ratios ranging from 0.09 to 0.23. GPs using POCTs attached less weight to clinical criteria. CONCLUSION: GPs using rapid tests are mainly influenced by POCT results in the decision to prescribe antibiotics. However, antibiotic prescribing is still observed with negative POCT results.

General practitioners' opinions and perceptions about antibiotic use for respiratory tract infections in primary care / Opiniones y percepciones de los médicos de familia en torno al uso de antibióticos en infecciones respiratorias en atención primaria

No disponible

Reducing antibiotic prescribing for lower respiratory tract infections 6 years after a multifaceted intervention.

AIMS: Few studies have evaluated the long-term impact of interventions on antibiotic prescription for lower respiratory tract infections (LRTI). This study was aimed at evaluating the use of antibiotics prescribed for LRTIs by general practitioners (GP) who underwent a multifaceted intervention carried out 6 years earlier. METHODS: General practitioners who had completed two registrations in 2008 and 2009 were again invited to participate in a third audit-based study in 2015. A multifaceted intervention was held 1-3 months before the second registration. A new group of GPs with no previous training on the rational use of antibiotics were also invited to participate and acted as controls. Multilevel logistic regression was performed considering the prescription of antibiotics as the dependent variable. RESULTS: A total of 121 GPs of the 210 who underwent the intervention (57.6%) and 117 control GPs registered 4333 episodes of LRTIs. On adjustment for covariables, compared with the antibiotic prescription for LRTIs observed just after the intervention, antibiotic prescription slightly increased 6 years later among GPs who had undergone the intervention (OR 1.17, 95% CI 0.95-1.43), while control GPs prescribed significantly more antibiotics (OR 2.31, 95% CI 1.62-3.29). However, withholding antibiotic prescribing with C-reactive protein (CRP) values <10 mg/L was more frequently observed just after the intervention compared 6 years later (12.7% vs 32.2%; P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Antibiotic prescribing for LRTIs remains low 6 years after an intervention, although GPs are less confident to withhold antibiotic therapy in patients with low CRP levels.

Long-term effect of a practice-based intervention (HAPPY AUDIT) aimed at reducing antibiotic prescribing in patients with respiratory tract infections.

Objectives: Few studies have evaluated the long-term effects of educational interventions on antibiotic prescription and the results are controversial. This study was aimed at assessing the effect of a multifaceted practice-based intervention carried out 6 years earlier on current antibiotic prescription for respiratory tract infections (RTIs). Methods: The 210 general practitioners (GPs) who completed the first two registrations in 2008 and 2009 were invited to participate in a third registration. The intervention held before the second registration consisted of discussion about the first registration of results, appropriate use of antibiotics for RTIs, patient brochures, a workshop and the provision of rapid tests. As in the previous registrations, GPs were instructed to complete a template for all the patients with RTIs during 15 working days in 2015. A new group of GPs from the same areas was also invited to participate and acted as controls. A multilevel logistic regression analysis was performed considering the prescription of antibiotics as the dependent variable. Results: A total of 121 GPs included in the 2009 intervention (57.6%) and 117 control GPs registered 22 247 RTIs. On adjustment for covariables, compared with the antibiotic prescription observed just after the intervention, GPs assigned to intervention prescribed slightly more antibiotics 6 years later albeit without statistically significant differences (OR 1.08, 95% CI 0.89-1.31, P = 0.46), while GPs in the control group prescribed significantly more antibiotics (OR 2.74, 95% CI 2.09-3.59, P < 0.001). Conclusions: This study shows that a single multifaceted intervention continues to reduce antibiotic prescribing 6 years later.

The STOP-AB trial protocol: efficacy and safety of discontinuing patient antibiotic treatment when physicians no longer consider it necessary.

INTRODUCTION: Since 2011, the Spanish Society of Family Medicine has recommended general practitioners (GPs) to ask their patients to stop taking antibiotics when they suspect a viral infection. However, this practice is seldom used because uncertainty about diagnosis, and fear of consequences of discontinuing antibiotic therapy, as well as perceived pressure to continue prescribing antibiotics and potential conflict with patients are more of a concern for GPs than antibiotic resistance. The main objective of this study is to determine whether discontinuation of antibiotic therapy when a GP no longer considers it necessary has any impact on the number of days with severe symptoms. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled clinical trial. The study was conducted in 10 primary care centres in Spain. We included patients from 18 to 75 years of age with uncomplicated acute respiratory tract infections-acute rhinosinusitis, acute sore throat, influenza or acute bronchitis-who had previously taken any dose of antibiotic for <3 days, which physicians no longer considered necessary. The patients were randomly assigned to the usual strategy of continuing antibiotic treatment or to discontinuing antibiotic therapy. A sample size of 240 patients per group was calculated on the basis of a reduction of 1 day in the duration of severe symptoms being a clinically relevant outcome. The primary outcome was the duration of severe symptoms, that is, symptoms scored 5 or 6 by means of validated symptom diaries. Secondary outcomes included antibiotics taken, adverse events, patient satisfaction and complications within the first 3 months. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was approved by the Ethical Board of Fundació Jordi Gol i Gurina (reference number: 16/093). The findings of this trial will bedisseminated through research conferences and peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02900820; pre-results.