Enhancing the training of community engagement officers to address vaccine hesitancy: a university and local authority collaboration

Introduction: Vaccine hesitancy/scepticism remains an issue, and ongoing actions to promote vaccination are needed. While no single intervention strategy addresses all instances of vaccine hesitancy, effective methods have been identified. For example, recommendations from a healthcare professional and dialogue-based, directly targeted approaches with personalised and tailored communications for different audiences, including from a trusted community member.1–

Trends and patterns in antibiotic prescribing among out-of-hours primary care providers in England, 2010–14

Objectives: Antimicrobial resistance is a global threat, increasing morbidity and mortality. In England, publicly funded clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) commission out-of-hours (OOH) primary care services outside daytime hours. OOH consultations represent 1% of in-hours general practice (GP) consultations. Antibiotic prescriptions increased 32% in non-GP community services between 2010 and 2013. We describe OOH antibiotic prescribing patterns and trends between 2010 and 2014. Methods: We: estimated the proportion of CCGs with OOH data available; described and compared antibiotic prescribing by volume of prescribed items, seasonality and trends in GP and OOH, using linear regression; and compared the proportion of broad-spectrum to total antibiotic prescriptions in OOHs with their respective CCGs in terms of seasonality and trends, using binomial regression. Results: Data were available for 143 of 211 (68%) CCGs. OOH antibiotic prescription volume represented 4.5%-5.4% of GP prescription volume and was stable over time ( P  =   0.37). The proportion of broad-spectrum antibiotic prescriptions increased in OOH when it increased in the CCG they operated in (regression coefficient 0.98; 95% CI 0.96-0.99). Compared with GP, the proportion of broad-spectrum antibiotic prescriptions in OOH was higher but decreased both in GP and OOH (-0.57%, 95% CI - 0.54% to - 0.6% and -0.76%, 95% CI - 0.59% to - 0.93% per year, respectively). Conclusions: OOH proportionally prescribed more antibiotics than GPs although we could not comment on prescribing appropriateness. OOH prescribing volume was stable over time, and followed GP seasonal patterns. OOH antibiotic prescribing reflected the CCGs they operated in but with relatively more broad-spectrum antibiotics than in-hours GP. Understanding factors influencing prescribing in OOH will enable the development of tailored interventions promoting optimal prescribing in this setting

Implementation of antimicrobial stewardship interventions recommended by national toolkits in primary and secondary healthcare sectors in England: TARGET and Start Smart Then Focus

Objectives: To assess and compare the implementation of antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) interventions recommended within the national AMS toolkits, TARGET and Start Smart Then Focus, in English primary and secondary healthcare settings in 2014, to determine the prevalence of cross-sector engagement to drive AMS interventions and to propose next steps to improve implementation of AMS. / Methods: Electronic surveys were circulated to all 211 Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs; primary sector) and to 146 (out of the 159) Acute Trusts (secondary sector) in England. Response rates were 39% and 68% for the primary and secondary sectors respectively. / Results: The majority of CCGs and Acute Trusts reported reviewing national AMS toolkits formally or informally (60% and 86% respectively). However, only 13% of CCGs and 46% of Acute NHS Trusts had developed an action plan for the implementation of these toolkits. Only 5% of CCGs had antimicrobial pharmacists in post; however the role of specialist antimicrobial pharmacists continued to remain embedded within Acute Trusts with 83% of responding Trusts having an antimicrobial pharmacist at a senior grade. / Conclusions: Review of national AMS toolkits in primary and secondary care is high; however implementation of the toolkits, through the development of action plans to deliver AMS interventions, requires improvement. For the first time, we report the extent of cross-sector and multidisciplinary collaboration to deliver AMS interventions in both primary and secondary care sectors in England. Results highlight that further qualitative and quantitative work is required to explore mutual benefits and promote best practice. Antimicrobial pharmacists remain leaders for implementing AMS interventions across both primary and secondary healthcare sectors

Antibiotic prescribing for residents in long-term-care facilities across the UK

Background: Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a major public health problem. Elderly residents in long-term-care facilities (LTCFs) are frequently prescribed antibiotics, particularly for urinary tract infections. Optimizing appropriate antibiotic use in this vulnerable population requires close collaboration between NHS healthcare providers and LTCF providers. Objectives: Our aim was to identify and quantify antibiotic prescribing in elderly residents in UK LTCFs. This is part of a wider programme of work to understand opportunities for pharmacy teams in the community to support residents and carers. Methods: This was a retrospective longitudinal cohort study. Data were extracted from a national pharmacy chain database of prescriptions dispensed for elderly residents in UK LTCFs over 12 months (November 2016–October 2017). Results: Data were analysed for 341 536 residents in LTCFs across the four UK nations, from which a total of 544 796 antibiotic prescriptions were dispensed for 167 002 residents. The proportion of residents prescribed at least one antibiotic over the 12 month period varied by LTCF, by month and by country. Conclusions: Whilst national data sets on antibiotic prescribing are available for hospitals and primary care, this is the first report on antibiotic prescribing for LTCF residents across all four UK nations, and the largest reported data set in this setting. Half of LTCF residents were prescribed at least one antibiotic over the 12 months, suggesting that there is an opportunity to optimize antibiotic use in this vulnerable population to minimize the risk of AMR and treatment failure. Pharmacy teams are well placed to support prudent antibiotic prescribing and improved antimicrobial stewardship in this population

Patient engagement with antibiotic messaging in secondary care: a qualitative feasibility study of the ‘review & revise’ experience

Background: We aimed to investigate and optimise the acceptability and usefulness of a patient leaflet about antibiotic prescribing decisions made during hospitalisation, and to explore individual patient experiences and preferences regarding the process of antibiotic prescription ‘review & revise’ which is a key strategy to minimise antibiotic overuse in hospitals. Methods: In this qualitative study, run within the feasibility study of a large, cluster-randomised stepped wedge trial of 36 hospital organisations, a series of semi-structured, think-aloud telephone interviews were conducted and data were analysed using thematic analysis. Fifteen adult patients who had experienced a recent acute medical hospital admission during which they had been prescribed antimicrobials and offered a patient leaflet about antibiotic prescribing were recruited to the study. Results: Participants reacted positively to the leaflet, reporting that it was both an accessible and important source of information which struck the appropriate balance between informing and reassuring. Participants all valued open communication with clinicians, and were keen to be involved in antibiotic prescribing decisions, with individuals reporting positive experiences regarding antibiotic prescription changes or stopping. Many participants had prior experience or knowledge of antibiotics and resistance, and generally welcomed efforts to reduce antibiotic usage. Overall, there was a feeling that healthcare professionals (HCPs) are trusted experts providing the most appropriate treatment for individual patient conditions. Conclusions: This study offers novel insights into how patients within secondary care are likely to respond to messages advocating a reduction in the use of antibiotics through the ‘review & revise’ approach. Due to the level of trust that patients place in their care provider, encouraging HCPs within secondary care to engage patients with greater communication and information provision could provide great advantages in the drive to reduce antibiotic use. It may also be beneficial for HCPs to view patient experiences as cumulative events that have the potential to impact future behaviour around antibiotic use. Finally, pre-testing messages about antibiotic prescribing and resistance is vital to dispelling any misconceptions either around effectiveness of treatment for patients, or perceptions of how messages may be received

Feasibility of a community pharmacy antimicrobial stewardship intervention (PAMSI): an innovative approach to improve patients’ understanding of their antibiotics

Background Community pharmacy staff have an opportunity to play a pivotal role in antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) due to their expertise in medicines and accessibility to patients. Objectives To develop and test the feasibility of a pharmacy AMS intervention (PAMSI) to increase community pharmacy staff’s capability, opportunity and motivation to check antibiotic appropriateness and provide self-care and adherence advice when dispensing antibiotics. Methods The PAMSI was centred around an Antibiotic Checklist, completed by patients and pharmacy staff, to facilitate personalized advice to the patient, based on their reported knowledge. An educational webinar for staff and patient-facing materials were also developed. Staff and patients completing Antibiotic Checklists were invited to provide feedback via questionnaires. Results In February 2019, 12 community pharmacies in England trialled the intervention. Forty-three pharmacy staff evaluated the educational webinar and reported increases in their understanding, confidence, commitment and intention to use the tools provided to give adherence and self-care advice. Over 4 weeks, 931 Antibiotic Checklists were completed. Staff reported being more focused on giving advice and able to address patients’ knowledge gaps (mainly: likely symptom duration; alcohol and food consumption advice; possible side effects from antibiotics; returning unused antibiotics to the pharmacy), resulting in increased self-reported effective and meaningful conversations. Conclusions Implementation of a PAMSI is feasible and effectively promotes AMS. Pharmacy staff and commissioners should consider this within their AMS plans. An optional digital format of the Antibiotic Checklist should be explored, for patients who are not collecting their antibiotic prescriptions themselves, and to save printing costs

Antimicrobial use in UK long-term care facilities: results of a point prevalence survey

Background The majority of people in long-term care facilities (LTCFs) are aged 65 years and older, and most of their care needs are provided by the LTCF staff. Provision of healthcare services for residents in LTCFs is variable and can result in disjointed care between carers and NHS healthcare professionals. Objectives Our aim was to understand the use of antibiotics in LTCFs across the UK and to identify potential gaps in knowledge and support for carers and residents when using antibiotics, in order to determine how community pharmacy teams can provide additional support. Methods A point prevalence survey (PPS) was conducted by community pharmacists (n = 57) when they carried out visits to LTCFs across the UK between 13 November and 12 December 2017. Anonymized data were recorded electronically by the individual pharmacists. Results Data were analysed for 17909 residents in 644 LTCFs across the UK. The mean proportion of residents on antibiotics on the day of the visit was as follows: 6.3% England (536 LTCFs), 7.6% Northern Ireland (35 LTCFs), 8.6% Wales (10 LTCFs) and 9.6% Scotland (63 LTCFs). The percentage of antibiotics prescribed for prophylactic use was 25.3%. Antibiotic-related training was reported as being available for staff in 6.8% of LTCFs and 7.1% of LTCFs reported use of a catheter passport scheme. Pharmacists conducting the PPS intervened during the survey for 9.5% of antibiotic prescription events; 53.4% of interventions were for clinical reasons and 32.2% were for administration reasons. Conclusions This survey identified high prophylactic use of antibiotics. There are opportunities for community pharmacy teams to improve antimicrobial stewardship in LTCF settings, including workforce education

Content and Mechanism of Action of National Antimicrobial Stewardship Interventions on Management of Respiratory Tract Infections in Primary and Community Care

A major modifiable factor contributing to antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is inappropriate use and overuse of antimicrobials, such as antibiotics. This study aimed to describe the content and mechanism of action of antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) interventions to improve appropriate antibiotic use for respiratory tract infections (RTI) in primary and community care. This study also aimed to describe who these interventions were aimed at and the specific behaviors targeted for change. Evidence-based guidelines, peer-review publications, and infection experts were consulted to identify behaviors relevant to AMS for RTI in primary care and interventions to target these behaviors. Behavior change tools were used to describe the content of interventions. Theoretical frameworks were used to describe mechanisms of action. A total of 32 behaviors targeting six different groups were identified (patients; prescribers; community pharmacists; providers; commissioners; providers and commissioners). Thirty-nine interventions targeting the behaviors were identified (patients = 15, prescribers = 22, community pharmacy staff = 8, providers = 18, and commissioners = 18). Interventions targeted a mean of 5.8 behaviors (range 1–27). Influences on behavior most frequently targeted by interventions were psychological capability (knowledge and skills); reflective motivation (beliefs about consequences, intentions, social/professional role and identity); and physical opportunity (environmental context and resources). Interventions were most commonly characterized as achieving change by training, enabling, or educating and were delivered mainly through guidelines, service provision, and communications & marketing. Interventions included a mean of four Behavior Change Techniques (BCTs) (range 1–14). We identified little intervention content targeting automatic motivation and social opportunity influences on behavior. The majority of interventions focussed on education and training, which target knowledge and skills though the provision of instructions on how to perform a behavior and information about health consequences. Interventions could be refined with the inclusion of relevant BCTs, such as goal-setting and action planning (identified in only a few interventions), to translate instruction on how to perform a behavior into action. This study provides a platform to refine content and plan evaluation of antimicrobial stewardship interventions

Guidance on the Selection of Appropriate Indicators for Quantification of Antimicrobial Usage in Humans and Animals

An increasing variety of indicators of antimicrobial usage has become available in human and veterinary medicine, with no consensus on the most appropriate indicators to be used. The objective of this review is therefore to provide guidance on the selection of indicators, intended for those aiming to quantify antimicrobial usage based on sales, deliveries or reimbursement data. Depending on the study objective, different requirements apply to antimicrobial usage quantification in terms of resolution, comprehensiveness, stability over time, ability to assess exposure and comparability. If the aim is to monitor antimicrobial usage trends, it is crucial to use a robust quantification system that allows stability over time in terms of required data and provided output; to compare usage between different species or countries, comparability must be ensured between the different populations. If data are used for benchmarking, the system comprehensiveness is particularly crucial, while data collected to study the association between usage and resistance should express the exposure level and duration as a measurement of the exerted selection pressure. Antimicrobial usage is generally described as the number of technical units consumed normalized by the population at risk of being treated in a defined period. The technical units vary from number of packages to number of individuals treated daily by adding different levels of complexity such as daily dose or weight at treatment. These technical units are then related to a description of the population at risk, based either on biomass or number of individuals. Conventions and assumptions are needed for all of these calculation steps. However, there is a clear lack of standardization, resulting in poor transparency and comparability. By combining study requirements with available approaches to quantify antimicrobial usage, we provide suggestions on the most appropriate indicators and data sources to be used for a given study objective