Article Text
Abstract
Objectives To investigate the antibiotic prescription pattern and factors that influence the physicians’ choice of antibiotic.
Design Observational study.
Setting Primary healthcare in Norway, December 2004 through November 2005.
Participants 426 general practitioners, GPs, in Norway, giving 24 888 respiratory tract infection episodes with 19 938 children aged 0–6 years.
Outcome measures Assess antibiotic prescription details and patient and GP characteristics associated with broad-spectrum and narrow-spectrum antibiotic use.
Results Of the 24 888 episodes in the study, 26.2% (95% CI 25.7% to 26.8%) included an antibiotic prescription. Penicillin V accounted for 42% and macrolide antibiotics for 30%. The prescription rate varied among the physicians, with a mean of 25.5% (95% CI 24.2% to 26.7%). Acute tonsillitis gave the highest odds for a prescription, OR 33.6 (95% CI 25.7% to 43.9%), compared to ‘acute respiratory tract infections and symptoms’ as a reference group. GPs with a prescription rate of 33.3% or higher had the larger probability for broad-spectrum antibiotic prescriptions, OR 3.33 (95% CI 2.01% to 5.54%). Antibiotic prescriptions increased with increasing patient age.
Conclusions We found a low antibiotic prescription rate for childhood respiratory tract infections. However, our figures indicate an overuse of macrolide antibiotics and penicillins with extended spectrum, more so than in the corresponding study including the adult population. Palatability of antibiotic suspensions and other administrative challenges affect medication compliance in children. To help combat antibiotic resistance, guidelines need to be followed, in particular for our youngest patients.
Trial registration number (clinicaltrials.org) NCT00272155.
- Respiratory
- General Paediatrics
- PRIMARY CARE
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial License, which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non commercial and is otherwise in compliance with the license. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ and http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/legalcode