Utilizing Behavioral Science to Improve Antibiotic Prescribing in Rural Urgent Care Settings

Abstract

Background: The rate of inappropriate antibiotic prescribing for acute respiratory tract infections (ARTIs) is 45% among urgent care centers across the United States. To contribute to the US National Action Plan for Combating Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria, which aims to decrease rates of inappropriate prescribing, we implemented 2 behavioral nudges using the evidence-based MITIGATE tool kit from urgent-care settings, at 3 high-volume, rural, urgent-care centers. Methods: An interrupted time series (ITS) analysis was conducted comparing a preintervention phase during the 2017–2018 influenza season (October through March) to the intervention phase during the 2018–2019 influenza season. We compared the rate of inappropriate or non–guideline-concordant antibiotic prescribing for ARTIs across 3 urgent-care locations. The 2 intervention behavioral nudges were (1) staff and patient education and (2) peer comparison. Provider education included presentations at staff meetings and grand rounds, and patient education print materials were distributed to the 3 locations coupled with news media and social media. We utilized the CDC “Be Antibiotics Aware” campaign materials, with our hospital’s logo added, and posted them in patient rooms and waiting areas. For the peer comparison behavioral intervention, providers were sent individual feedback e-mails with their prescribing data during the intervention period and a blinded ranking e-mail in which they were ranked in comparison to their peers. In the blinded ranking email, providers were placed into categories of “low prescribers,” those with a ≤23% inappropriate antibiotic prescribing rate based on the US National Action Plan for Combating Antibiotic-Resistance Bacteria 2020 goal, or “high prescribers,” those with a rate greater than the national average (45%) of inappropriate antibiotic prescribing for ARTI. Results: Our results show that fewer inappropriate antibiotic prescriptions were written during the intervention period (58.8%) than during the preintervention period (73.0%), resulting in a 14.5% absolute decrease in rates of inappropriate prescribing among urgent-care locations over a 6-month period (Fig. 1). The largest percentage decline in rates was seen in the month of April (−35.8%) when compared to April of the previous year. The ITS analysis revealed that the rate of inappropriate prescribing was statistically significantly different during the preintervention period compared to the intervention period (95% CI, −4.59 to −0.59; P = .0142). Conclusions: Using interventions outlined in the MITIGATE tool kit, we were able to reduce inappropriate antibiotic prescribing for ARTI in 3 rural, urgent-care locations.Funding: NoneDisclosures: Larissa May repo, Speaking honoraria-Cepheid Research grants-Roche Consultant-BioRad Advisory Board-Qvella Consultant-Nabriva