Overuse of Antibiotics
As physicians, we all have probably ordered a medicine or test that we know really wasn’t needed for a variety of reasons. It may be purely defensive in nature, patient request or to just confirm a suspicion. But a recent study defines which physicians are more likely to prescribe unnecessary antibiotics.
According to the results of a study reported in the October 9 issue of the Canadian Medical Association Journal, physicians who have been in practice longer, who have high-volume practices, and who were trained outside Canada are more likely to prescribe unneeded antibiotics and to prescribe the wrong antibiotics. I am sure this Canadian journal had no underlying bias.
We all know that inappropriate use of antibiotics promotes antibiotic resistance and this study was to assess whether physician knowledge, time in practice, place of training and practice volume explain the differences in antibiotic prescribing among physicians.
Inappropriate antibiotic use was defined as prescription of antibiotics for viral infections, and prescription of second- or third-line antibiotics given orally for bacterial infections.
The study included 104,230 patients diagnosed with viral infection and 65,304 diagnosed with bacterial infection.
They reported the outcomes to show that compared with University of Montréal graduates, international medical graduates were more likely to prescribe antibiotics for viral respiratory infections and physicians with increased time in practice had higher rates of inappropriate antibiotic prescribing.
Physicians with a high practice volume were more likely to prescribe antibiotics for viral respiratory infections and to prescribe second- and third-line antibiotics as first-line treatment more often than those in low volume practices.
They did admit there were limitations in the study as well as classification of illnesses, antibiotic resistance in certain areas which may cause selection of different drugs and several others.
Physicians responding to this study had several objections to the study and one notes that physicians and patients may be unwilling to tolerate the low risk of missing a bacterial diagnosis and therefore prescribe antibiotics to err on the side of caution.
According to the results of a study reported in the October 9 issue of the Canadian Medical Association Journal, physicians who have been in practice longer, who have high-volume practices, and who were trained outside Canada are more likely to prescribe unneeded antibiotics and to prescribe the wrong antibiotics. I am sure this Canadian journal had no underlying bias.
We all know that inappropriate use of antibiotics promotes antibiotic resistance and this study was to assess whether physician knowledge, time in practice, place of training and practice volume explain the differences in antibiotic prescribing among physicians.
Inappropriate antibiotic use was defined as prescription of antibiotics for viral infections, and prescription of second- or third-line antibiotics given orally for bacterial infections.
The study included 104,230 patients diagnosed with viral infection and 65,304 diagnosed with bacterial infection.
They reported the outcomes to show that compared with University of Montréal graduates, international medical graduates were more likely to prescribe antibiotics for viral respiratory infections and physicians with increased time in practice had higher rates of inappropriate antibiotic prescribing.
Physicians with a high practice volume were more likely to prescribe antibiotics for viral respiratory infections and to prescribe second- and third-line antibiotics as first-line treatment more often than those in low volume practices.
They did admit there were limitations in the study as well as classification of illnesses, antibiotic resistance in certain areas which may cause selection of different drugs and several others.
Physicians responding to this study had several objections to the study and one notes that physicians and patients may be unwilling to tolerate the low risk of missing a bacterial diagnosis and therefore prescribe antibiotics to err on the side of caution.
Labels: antibiotics, study
posted by Anonymous at 6:10 AM
3 Comments:
Big article in the paper a day or so ago about the Creationism Museum in Kentucky. I know that is a topic of interest to you. Have you been to the museum yet? What do you think about it?
I have not been but have talked to many people who have.
I believe the museum is helpful to anyone who questions their belief or for those who eagerly want to see all sides of the debate.
It gives a lot of credible evidence to support what they believe.
For closed minded skeptics, it won't change anything.
So...it could be true that the Earth is only about 6,000 years old and that dinosaurs were passengers on Noah's Ark?
Post a Comment
<< Home