Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • BJGP LIFE
  • MORE
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • Video
    • Audio
    • Librarian information
    • Resilience
    • COVID-19 Clinical Solutions
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers

User menu

  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
British Journal of General Practice
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers
  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in
  • Follow bjgp on Twitter
  • Visit bjgp on Facebook
  • Blog
  • Listen to BJGP podcast
  • Subscribe BJGP on YouTube
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
British Journal of General Practice

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • BJGP LIFE
  • MORE
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • Video
    • Audio
    • Librarian information
    • Resilience
    • COVID-19 Clinical Solutions
Research Article

Patients' responses to delayed antibiotic prescription for acute upper respiratory tract infections.

Martin Edwards, Julie Dennison and Philip Sedgwick
British Journal of General Practice 2003; 53 (496): 845-850.
Martin Edwards
Guy's, King's and St Thomas' School of Medicine, London. mail@martinedwards.me.uk
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Julie Dennison
Guy's, King's and St Thomas' School of Medicine, London. mail@martinedwards.me.uk
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Philip Sedgwick
Guy's, King's and St Thomas' School of Medicine, London. mail@martinedwards.me.uk
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Upper respiratory tract infections (URTIs) account for approximately 50% of antibiotic prescriptions in the United Kingdom. General practitioners (GPs) frequently issue such prescriptions simply because they believe that the patient expects it. Deferred prescribing (issuing a prescription, but with instructions to wait for no spontaneous improvement before deciding whether to use it) might address patients' expectations, while minimising actual antibiotic consumption. Although the technique is quite widely practiced, patients' attitudes and responses to it are unclear. AIMS: To establish the proportion of recipients who claim to consume their delayed antibiotic prescriptions. To elicit factors associated with patients' decisions to consume their antibiotics, and patients' confidence in taking this decision. DESIGN OF STUDY: Postal questionnaire survey. SETTING: Patients from 13 group practices in the south of England. METHODS: Patients who had received a delayed antibiotic prescription for URTI from their GP were posted a questionnaire 2 days after their consultation. RESULTS: Three hundred and seventy-four subjects were recruited of whom 256 (68.4%) returned their questionnaires. Just over half (53.1%) of the responders claimed to have consumed their antibiotics. The majority of patients (87.1%) were confident about taking the decision as to whether to use their antibiotics, and 92.5% would choose to receive a delayed prescription again. Subjects were more likely to take their antibiotics if their presenting symptoms included a fever or sinus pain. CONCLUSION: Most patients are confident in making the decision about whether or not to take their antibiotics when receiving a delayed prescription for URTIs. Antibiotic consumption is associated with presenting symptoms, and this has implications for future practice.

Supplementary Material

Supplementary appendix 1. Patient information sheet Supplementary appendix 1
Supplementary appendix 2. Patient questionnaire Supplementary appendix 2
Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

In this issue

British Journal of General Practice: 53 (496)
British Journal of General Practice
Vol. 53, Issue 496
November 2003
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Download PDF
Email Article

Thank you for recommending British Journal of General Practice.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person to whom you are recommending the page knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Patients' responses to delayed antibiotic prescription for acute upper respiratory tract infections.
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from British Journal of General Practice
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from British Journal of General Practice.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Patients' responses to delayed antibiotic prescription for acute upper respiratory tract infections.
Martin Edwards, Julie Dennison, Philip Sedgwick
British Journal of General Practice 2003; 53 (496): 845-850.

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
Patients' responses to delayed antibiotic prescription for acute upper respiratory tract infections.
Martin Edwards, Julie Dennison, Philip Sedgwick
British Journal of General Practice 2003; 53 (496): 845-850.
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
  • Mendeley logo Mendeley

Jump to section

  • Top
  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Supplementary Material
  • Figures & Data
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF

More in this TOC Section

  • Integrated primary mental health care: threat or opportunity in the new NHS?
  • "The cawing of the crow...Cassandra-like, prognosticating woe".
  • New concepts in screening.
Show more Research Article

Related Articles

Cited By...

Intended for Healthcare Professionals

BJGP Life

BJGP Open

 

Tweets by @BJGPjournal

 
 

British Journal of General Practice

NAVIGATE

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • All Issues
  • Online First
  • Authors & reviewers

RCGP

  • BJGP for RCGP members
  • BJGP Open
  • RCGP eLearning
  • InnovAiT Journal
  • Jobs and careers

MY ACCOUNT

  • RCGP members' login
  • Subscriber login
  • Activate subscription
  • Terms and conditions

NEWS AND UPDATES

  • About BJGP
  • Alerts
  • RSS feeds
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

AUTHORS & REVIEWERS

  • Submit an article
  • Writing for BJGP: research
  • Writing for BJGP: other sections
  • BJGP editorial process & policies
  • BJGP ethical guidelines
  • Peer review for BJGP

CUSTOMER SERVICES

  • Advertising
  • Contact subscription agent
  • Copyright
  • Librarian information

CONTRIBUTE

  • BJGP Life
  • eLetters
  • Feedback

CONTACT US

BJGP Journal Office
RCGP
30 Euston Square
London NW1 2FB
Tel: +44 (0)20 3188 7400
Email: journal@rcgp.org.uk

British Journal of General Practice is an editorially-independent publication of the Royal College of General Practitioners
© 2023 British Journal of General Practice

Print ISSN: 0960-1643
Online ISSN: 1478-5242