http://bmj.com/cgi/content/abstract/323/7320/1037

 

Full text of this article

PDF of this article

Email this article to a friend

Send a response to this article

See related This week in BMJ item

Other related articles in BMJ

Download to Citation Manager

Search Medline for articles by:
Priest, P. || Wise, R.

Alert me when:
New articles cite this article

Collections under which this article appears:
Other Public Health
Drugs: infections
Other respiratory infections
Microbiology
Clinical Research

BMJ 2001;323:1037-1041 ( 3 November )

Primary care

Antibacterial prescribing and antibacterial resistance in English general practice: cross sectional study

Patricia Priest, Nuffield medical fellow, a Patricia Yudkin, university lecturer in medical statistics, a Cliodna McNulty, primary care coordinator, b David Mant, professor of general practice. a

a University of Oxford, Department of Primary Health Care, Oxford, OX3 7LF, b Gloucester Public Health Laboratory, Gloucestershire Royal Hospital, Gloucester GL1 3NN

Correspondence to: P Priest patricia.priest@dphpc.ox.ac.uk

Objective: To quantify the relation between community based antibacterial prescribing and antibacterial resistance in community acquired disease.
Design: Cross sectional study of antibacterial prescribing and antibacterial resistance of routine isolates within individual practices and primary care groups.
Setting: 405 general practices (38 groups) in south west and north west England.
Main outcome measures: Correlation between antibacterial prescribing and resistance for urinary coliforms and Streptococcus pneumoniae.
Results: Antibacterial resistance in urinary coliform isolates is common but the correlation with prescribing rates was relatively low for individual practices (ampicillin and amoxicillin rs=0.20, P=0.001; trimethoprim rs=0.24, P=0.0001) and primary care groups (ampicillin and amoxicillin rs=0.44, P=0.05; trimethoprim rs=0.31, P=0.09). Regression coefficients were also low; a practice prescribing 20% less ampicillin and amoxicillin than average would have about 1% fewer resistant isolates (0.94/100; 95% confidence interval 0.02 to 1.85). Resistance of S pneumoniae to both penicillin and erythromycin remains uncommon, and no clear relation with prescribing was found.
Conclusions: Routine microbiological isolates should not be used for surveillance of antibacterial resistance in the community or for monitoring the outcome of any change in antibacterial prescribing by general practitioners. Trying to reduce the overall level of antibiotic prescribing in UK general practice may not be the most effective strategy for reducing resistance in the community.


What is already known on this topic
The probability of an individual hosting a resistant organism is increased by recent use of an antibacterial drug

Correlation between antibacterial prescribing and coliform resistance in routine microbiological samples from the community has been reported in one study

What this study adds
In English general practice, there are significant but low correlations between antibacterial prescribing and resistance in routine isolates of urinary coliforms

Substantial differences in prescribing between high and low prescribing practices are associated with only small differences in resistance

Improved methods of assessing national antimicrobial resistance are required



© BMJ 2001

ALL INFORMATION, DATA, AND MATERIAL CONTAINED, PRESENTED, OR PROVIDED HERE IS FOR GENERAL INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS REFLECTING THE KNOWLEDGE OR OPINIONS OF THE PUBLISHER, AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED OR INTENDED AS PROVIDING MEDICAL OR LEGAL ADVICE.  THE DECISION WHETHER OR NOT TO VACCINATE IS AN IMPORTANT AND COMPLEX ISSUE AND SHOULD BE MADE BY YOU, AND YOU ALONE, IN CONSULTATION WITH YOUR HEALTH CARE PROVIDER.