Intended for healthcare professionals

Practice NIHR Signals

Clinicians prescribe antibiotics for childhood respiratory tract infection based on assessment, rather than parental expectation

BMJ 2020; 368 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.l6768 (Published 10 January 2020) Cite this as: BMJ 2020;368:l6768

Editorial

NIHR’s research signals in The BMJ

  1. Rob Cook, clinical director1,
  2. Peter Davidson, clinical adviser2,
  3. Alicia White, clinical specialist1
  4. on behalf of NIHR Dissemination Centre
  1. 1Bazian, Economist Intelligence Unit Healthcare, London, UK
  2. 2Wessex Institute, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
  1. Correspondence to R Cook rob.cook{at}bazian.com

The study

Cabral C, Horwood J, Symonds J, et al. Understanding the influence of parent-clinician communication on antibiotic prescribing for children with respiratory tract infections in primary care: a qualitative observational study using a conversation analysis approach. BMC Fam Pract 2019;20:102.

This project was funded by the NIHR School for Primary Care Research Programme (project number SPCR204).

To read the full NIHR Signal, go to: https://discover.dc.nihr.ac.uk/content/signal-000829/gps-assessment-not-parental-expectation-drives-antibiotic-prescribing

Why was this study needed?

Estimates suggest that antibiotics are overprescribed in general practice compared with ideal levels based on guidelines and expert opinion. This overprescribing can contribute to increasing antibiotic resistance.

Data from English primary care settings suggest that overprescribing of antibiotics is particularly pronounced for respiratory tract conditions. For example, only about 25% of antibiotic prescriptions for acute cough in patients without comorbidities were considered necessary.

There have been concerns that perceived expectation from parents during consultations might influence clinicians’ decisions to prescribe antibiotics for children. While this possibility has been studied in other countries, it has not been explored in the UK.

This study aimed to fill this gap by exploring associations between parent-clinician communication and antibiotic prescribing for children with respiratory tract infection in primary care in England.

What did this study do?

This NIHR funded mixed methods study used conversation analysis and descriptive quantitative analysis of 56 video recorded consultations in six general practices in the south west of England. All consultations took place in 2013 and related to children under 12 with acute cough and respiratory tract infection.

The practices selected were from a range of neighbourhoods, including deprived and affluent areas. Thirteen clinicians took part, including nine general practitioners, three nurse practitioners, and one physician assistant.

Fifty six parents accompanying 60 children aged three months to 12 years agreed to participate, representing a 72% response rate. Thirteen consultations included non-native English speakers. Just over a third (36%) of parents identified as non-white ethnicity.

The study design was guided by a Public and Patient Involvement Group of local parents.

What did it find?

Overall, the results did not suggest a link between parents’ communication behaviour and antibiotic prescribing.

• Fifteen parents (27%) used language that implied a possible need for or expectation of antibiotic treatment. This included suggesting a possible diagnosis such as “chest infection,” or specifying symptoms such as being “phlegmy … right on the chest.” These cases were not associated with higher rates of antibiotic prescription (13% in these consultations compared with 24% in all other consultations).

• No expectation of antibiotic treatment was apparent from the language used by 73% of parents (n=41). In these instances, parents described their child’s symptoms only (40%), suggested that the cause might be viral (20%), or gave possible explanations for symptoms (such as coughing so much that it caused vomiting, 13%).

• Antibiotics were prescribed in 12 cases (21%). In 11 cases, this was linked to specific clinical observations. Eight (14%) antibiotic prescriptions were for immediate use linked to chest examination sounds, chest pain, yellow phlegm, or ear infection. In four consultations (7%) delayed antibiotic prescriptions were given in case symptoms such as fever did not resolve.

• In most cases, the parent either briefly acknowledged (77%) or actively agreed with the clinician’s treatment recommendation (5%). In six cases the parent responded to the treatment recommendation with a question, mainly to clarify home care advice. In one case of a “no antibiotic” recommendation, the parent questioned what to do after the recommended five day “watch and wait” period, given that accessing same day appointments was problematic. In this case the clinician gave a delayed antibiotic prescription.

What does current guidance say on this issue?

NICE has produced a guideline on prescribing antibiotics for self-limiting respiratory tract infections (2008). It recommends that a no antibiotic prescribing strategy or a delayed antibiotic prescribing strategy should be agreed for patients with conditions such as acute cough or bronchitis. The guideline gives advice on identifying those patients who are likely to be at risk of developing complications, and therefore need an immediate antibiotic prescription and/or further investigation and management.

NICE also has individual guidelines aiming to ensure appropriate antibiotic prescribing for cough, otitis media, sinusitis, and sore throat, as well as a quality standard on general antimicrobial stewardship.

What are the implications?

This study identified little evidence of parental demand for prescription of antibiotics for children with respiratory tract infection. Parents mainly appeared to be seeking the clinician’s assessment of their child’s condition rather than a prescription of specific drugs.

Although based on a small set of observations, the results support the continued efforts to find better ways to differentiate mild from serious illness.

Footnotes

  • Competing interestsThe BMJ has judged that there are no disqualifying financial ties to commercial companies. The authors declare the following other interests: none.

  • Further details of The BMJ policy on financial interests is here: https://www.bmj.com/about-bmj/resources-authors/forms-policies-and-checklists/declaration-competing-interests

  • All authors contributed to development and review of this summary, as part of the wider NIHR Signals editorial team (https://www.bmj.com/NIHR-signals). RC is guarantor.

  • Contributor Maria J Grant.

  • Disclaimer NIHR Signals are owned by the Department of Health and Social Care and are made available to the BMJ under licence. NIHR Signals report and comment on health and social care research but do not offer any endorsement of the research. The NIHR assumes no responsibility or liability arising from any error or omission or from the use of any information contained in NIHR Signals.

  • Permission to reuse these articles should be directed to disseminationcentre@nihr.ac.uk.

References