Multisite exploration of clinical decision making for antibiotic use by emergency medicine providers using quantitative and qualitative methods

Abstract

Objectives: To explore current practices and decision making regarding antimicrobial prescribing among emergency department (ED) clinical providers.

Methods: We conducted a survey of ED providers recruited from 8 sites in 3 cities. Using purposeful sampling, we then recruited 21 providers for in-depth interviews. Additionally, we observed 10 patient-provider interactions at one of the ED sites. SAS 9.3 was used for descriptive and predictive statistics. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using a thematic, constructivist approach with consensus coding using NVivo 10.0. Field and interview notes collected during the observational study were aligned with themes identified through individual interviews.

Results: Of 150 survey respondents, 76% agreed or strongly agreed that antibiotics are overused in the ED, while half believed they personally did not overprescribe. Eighty-nine percent used a smartphone or tablet in the ED for antibiotic prescribing decisions. Several significant differences were found between attending and resident physicians. Interview analysis identified 42 codes aggregated into the following themes: (1) resource and environmental factors that affect care; (2) access to and quality of care received outside of the ED consult; (3) patient-provider relationships; (4) clinical inertia; and (5) local knowledge generation. The observational study revealed limited patient understanding of antibiotic use. Providers relied heavily upon diagnostics and provided limited education to patients. Most patients denied a priori expectations of being prescribed antibiotics.

Conclusions: Patient, provider, and healthcare system factors should be considered when designing interventions to improve antimicrobial stewardship in the ED setting.

Figure 1

Semi-Structured Interview Guide Questions

Figure 1

Semi-Structured Interview Guide Questions

Figure 2

ED Observational Study Data Collection Tool