Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38149298›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in veterinary science2023

A mixed-methods approach utilising electronic health records to examine antimicrobial prescription surrounding gastrointestinal clinical presentations in dogs and cats.

Ivo S Fins, David A Singleton, Alan D Radford, Fernando Sánchez-Vizcaíno, Gina L Pinchbeck

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in veterinary science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Ivo S FinsInstitute of Infection, Veterinary and Ecological Sciences, Department of Livestock and One Health, University of Liverpool, Neston, United Kingdom.
David A SingletonInstitute of Infection, Veterinary and Ecological Sciences, Department of Livestock and One Health, University of Liverpool, Neston, United Kingdom.
Alan D RadfordInstitute of Infection, Veterinary and Ecological Sciences, Department of Infection Biology and Microbiomes, University of Liverpool, Neston, United Kingdom.
Fernando Sánchez-VizcaínoBristol Veterinary School, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.
Gina L PinchbeckInstitute of Infection, Veterinary and Ecological Sciences, Department of Livestock and One Health, University of Liverpool, Neston, United Kingdom.
University of Liverpool · GBUniversity of Bristol · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Systemically-administered antimicrobials are often prescribed in canine and feline gastrointestinal clinical presentations. Responsible use of antimicrobials, particularly those considered Highest Priority Critically Important Antimicrobials (HPCIAs) is vital to tackle antimicrobial resistance. Although practice-level prescription guidance is available, further strategies based on a greater understanding of antimicrobial prescription at the population-level are needed. Here, we used a mixed-methods approach, harnessing veterinary electronic health records (EHRs) to characterise the use of antimicrobials in canine and feline gastrointestinal presentations, and to explore justification and reasoning around antimicrobial prescribing, particularly of HPCIAs. Methods: This observational study used 23,337 EHRs complemented with veterinary practitioner-completed questionnaires, from canine and feline gastrointestinal consultations from 225 volunteer UK veterinary practices between April 2014 and September 2018. Results: A total of 83.4% (95% confidence interval (CI) 82.6-84.3) gastrointestinal presentations were reported as mild, with non-haemorrhagic diarrhoea and vomiting the most frequently reported clinical signs. Systemically-administered antimicrobials occurred in 28.6% of canine (95% CI 26.9-30.3) and 22.4% of feline (95% CI 20.4-24.4) gastrointestinal consultations, with HPCIA prescription occurring more frequently in cats. Results of multivariable analysis showed the presence of non-haemorrhagic diarrhoea (canine Odds Ratio (OR) 2.1, 95% CI 1.9-2.3; feline OR 1.8, 95% CI 1.5-2.1), haemorrhagic diarrhoea (canine OR 4.2, 95% CI 3.8-4.7; feline OR 3.1, 95% CI 2.4-3.8), and moderate/severe presentations (canine OR 1.9, 95% CI 1.7-2.8; feline OR 2.0, 95% CI 1.7-2.5) were positively associated with receiving a systemically-administered antimicrobial. Thematic analysis of clinical narrative content of 516 gastrointestinal consultations where HPCIAs were prescribed allowed the identification of ten factors underpinning reasoning or decision-making for HPCIA prescription: perceived animal/owner compliance; owner's expectations; perceived risk of infection; clinical signs; recent clinical history; perceived positive previous response to antimicrobial therapy; geriatric patients and euthanasia; concomitant conditions; diagnostic testing and the behavioral trend to trial antimicrobial therapy empirically in gastrointestinal cases. No explicit justification for HPCIA prescription was recorded in 77% of cases. Discussion: Improving recorded justification represents a clear target for stewardship programmes. By utilising a complementary mixed-methods approach to EHRs, this study unlocks previously untapped data recorded within EHRs. These results can help inform targeted interventions, contributing towards enhanced antimicrobial stewardship.

Indexed as

antimicrobial prescriptioncompanion animalselectronic health recordsgastrointestinal presentationsmixed-methodsveterinary health informatics

Identifiers

PMID38149298
PMCPMC10749927
OpenAlexW4389622423

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.