P-1645. Appropriateness of Ambulatory Antibiotic Prescriptions Given Outside of Formal Patient-Clinician Encounters

Abstract Background There are limited published data on the frequency and appropriateness of outpatient antibiotic prescriptions ordered outside of formal patient-clinician encounters. Methods A random sample of oral antibiotics prescribed to adult patients from 4 primary care practices were manually reviewed for appropriateness. The need for any antibiotic, as well as the appropriateness of agent selection and duration, were compared between visit-based (formal in-person, video, or telephone encounters) and non-visit-based encounters. Results Of the 859 prescriptions reviewed, 543 (63.2%) were generated from visit-based encounters (48.2%, 13.2% and 1.9% were from in-person, video, and telephone visits, respectively) and 316 (36.8%) were non-visit-based. Overall, 29.7% of prescriptions were written despite no antibiotic indication (Table). Antibiotics were indicated in 382/543 (70.3%) of visit-based encounters, vs 165/316 (52.2%) of non-visit-based encounters (P< 0.0001). When an antibiotic was indicated, agent selection was more frequently appropriate in visit-based encounters (88.7% vs 81.8%, P=0.006), with no difference in appropriate duration (81.9% vs 89.7%, P=0.49). When duration was inappropriate, it was too long in 94.5% of cases. Among visit-based prescribing, antibiotic prescriptions were indicated more frequently from in-person encounters as compared to virtual (combined video and telephone) encounters (73.4% vs 60.5%, P=0.008). Compared to visit-based antibiotic prescriptions, significantly fewer non-visit-based antibiotic prescriptions were associated with any diagnosis code (543/543 (100%) vs 189/316 (59.8%), P< 0.0001). Azithromycin and fluoroquinolones were more likely to be inappropriately chosen agents compared to other antibiotics (46.7% vs 12.4%, P< 0.0001, and 45.5% vs 12.4%, P< 0.0001, respectively). Conclusion Compared to antibiotic prescriptions from formal patient-clinician encounters, antibiotic prescriptions generated from non-visit-based encounters were significantly less indicated, with less appropriate agent selection, and were frequently not associated with a diagnosis code. Outpatient stewardship efforts should target non-visit-based encounters. Disclosures Dustin R. Carr, PharmD, BCPS, BCIDP, Merck: Advisor/Consultant Derek N. Bremmer, PharmD, BCIDP, Thermo Fischer Scientific: Expert Testimony

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Open Forum Infectious Diseases
Published
2025-01-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofae631.1811
Primary Topic
Antibiotic Use and Resistance
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

P-1645. Appropriateness of Ambulatory Antibiotic Prescriptions Given Outside of Formal Patient-Clinician Encounters

Edmund Appiah‐Kubi, George Bchech, Dustin R Carr, Matthew A Moffa et al.
1 links
Open Forum Infectious Diseases
Antibiotic Use and Resistance
article

P-1645. Appropriateness of Ambulatory Antibiotic Prescriptions Given Outside of Formal Patient-Clinician Encounters

Edmund Appiah‐Kubi, George Bchech, Dustin R Carr, Matthew A Moffa, Thomas Walsh, Derek N. Bremmer, Carley Buchanan, Nathan R Shively, Sophia Barber, Tamara L. Trienski, Jerod Nagel, Shenjun Zhu, Ryan Rothman, Vivian Kalu
article en

Abstract

Abstract Background There are limited published data on the frequency and appropriateness of outpatient antibiotic prescriptions ordered outside of formal patient-clinician encounters. Methods A random sample of oral antibiotics prescribed to adult patients from 4 primary care practices were manually reviewed for appropriateness. The need for any antibiotic, as well as the appropriateness of agent selection and duration, were compared between visit-based (formal in-person, video, or telephone encounters) and non-visit-based encounters. Results Of the 859 prescriptions reviewed, 543 (63.2%) were generated from visit-based encounters (48.2%, 13.2% and 1.9% were from in-person, video, and telephone visits, respectively) and 316 (36.8%) were non-visit-based. Overall, 29.7% of prescriptions were written despite no antibiotic indication (Table). Antibiotics were indicated in 382/543 (70.3%) of visit-based encounters, vs 165/316 (52.2%) of non-visit-based encounters (P< 0.0001). When an antibiotic was indicated, agent selection was more frequently appropriate in visit-based encounters (88.7% vs 81.8%, P=0.006), with no difference in appropriate duration (81.9% vs 89.7%, P=0.49). When duration was inappropriate, it was too long in 94.5% of cases. Among visit-based prescribing, antibiotic prescriptions were indicated more frequently from in-person encounters as compared to virtual (combined video and telephone) encounters (73.4% vs 60.5%, P=0.008). Compared to visit-based antibiotic prescriptions, significantly fewer non-visit-based antibiotic prescriptions were associated with any diagnosis code (543/543 (100%) vs 189/316 (59.8%), P< 0.0001). Azithromycin and fluoroquinolones were more likely to be inappropriately chosen agents compared to other antibiotics (46.7% vs 12.4%, P< 0.0001, and 45.5% vs 12.4%, P< 0.0001, respectively). Conclusion Compared to antibiotic prescriptions from formal patient-clinician encounters, antibiotic prescriptions generated from non-visit-based encounters were significantly less indicated, with less appropriate agent selection, and were frequently not associated with a diagnosis code. Outpatient stewardship efforts should target non-visit-based encounters. Disclosures Dustin R. Carr, PharmD, BCPS, BCIDP, Merck: Advisor/Consultant Derek N. Bremmer, PharmD, BCIDP, Thermo Fischer Scientific: Expert Testimony

Open Forum Infectious DiseasesVol. 12(Supplement_1)
Allegheny Health Network (US), Allegheny General Hospital (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 97%
Antibiotic Use and Resistance
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.