Search

Background: Variation in prescription of antibiotics in primary care can indicate poor clinical practice that contributes to the increase of resistant strains. General Practitioners (GPs), as a professional group, are expected to have a fairly homogeneous prescribing style. In this paper, we describe variation in prescribing style within and across groups of GPs from six countries. Methods: Cross-sectional study with the inclusion of 457 GPs and 6394 sore throat patients. We describe variation in prescribing antibiotics for sore throat patients across six countries and assess whether variation in “prescribing style” - understood as a subjective tendency to prescribe - has an important effect on variation in prescription of antibiotics by using the concept of prescribing style as a latent variable in a multivariable model. We report variation as a Median Odds Ratio (MOR) which is the transformation of the random effect variance onto an odds ratio; Thus, MOR = 1 means similar odds or strict homogeneity between GPs' prescribing style, while a MOR higher than 1 denotes heterogeneity in prescribing style. Results: In all countries some GPs always prescribed antibiotics to all their patients, while other GPs never did. After adjusting for patient and GP characteristics, prescribing style in the group of GPs from Russia was about three times more heterogeneous than the prescribing style in the group of GPs from Denmark - Median Odds Ratio (6.8, 95% CI 3.1;8.8) and (2.6, 95% CI 2.2;4.4) respectively. Conclusion: Prescribing style is an important source of variation in prescription of antibiotics within and across countries, even after adjusting for patient and GP characteristics. Interventions aimed at influencing the prescribing style of GPs must encompass context-specific actions at the policy-making level alongside GP-targeted interventions to enable GPs to react more objectively to the external demands that are in place when making the decision of prescribing antibiotics or not. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: It is generally acknowledged that Denmark is one, if not the, leading country in terms of the use of information technology by its primary care physicians. Other countries, notably excluding the United States and Canada, are also advanced in terms of electronic medical records in general practitioner offices and clinics. Purpose: This paper compares the status of primary care physician office computing in Andalucía to that of Denmark by contrasting the functionality of electronic medical records (EMRs) and the ability to electronically communicate clinical information in both jurisdictions. Methods: A novel scoring system has been developed based on data gathered from databases held by the respective jurisdictional programs, and interviews with individuals involved in the deployment of the systems. The scoring methodology was applied for the first time in a comparison of the degree of automation in primary care physician offices in Denmark and the province of Alberta in Canada. It was also used to compare Denmark and New Zealand. This paper is the third offering of this method of scoring the adoption of electronic medical records in primary care office settings which hopefully may be applicable to other health jurisdictions at national, state, or provincial levels. Results: Although similar in many respects, there are significant differences between these two relatively autonomous health systems which have led to the rates of uptake of physician office computing. Particularly notable is the reality that the Danish primary care physicians have individual “Electronic Medical Records” while in Andalucía, the primary care physicians share a common record which when secondary care is fully implemented will indeed be an “Electronic Health Record”. Conclusion: It is clear that the diffusion of technology, within the primary care physician sector of the health care market, is subject to historical, financial, legal, cultural, and social factors. This tale of two places illustrates the issues, and different ways that they have been addressed. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]