↓ Skip to main content

A needs assessment study for optimising prescribing practice in secondary care junior doctors: the Antibiotic Prescribing Education among Doctors (APED)

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
144 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A needs assessment study for optimising prescribing practice in secondary care junior doctors: the Antibiotic Prescribing Education among Doctors (APED)
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, August 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12879-016-1800-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Myriam Gharbi, Luke S. P. Moore, Enrique Castro-Sánchez, Elpiniki Spanoudaki, Charlotte Grady, Alison H. Holmes, Lydia N. Drumright

Abstract

Appropriate antimicrobial prescribing is essential for patient care, yet up to half of antimicrobial prescriptions written in the UK are sub-optimal. Improving prescriber education has recently been promoted as a mechanism to optimise antimicrobial use, but identification of key learning objectives to facilitate this is so far lacking. Using qualitative methods we investigated junior doctor knowledge, attitudes, and behaviours around antimicrobial prescribing to identify key areas to address in future educational programmes. A cross-sectional survey of qualified doctors in training in West London was undertaken exploring antimicrobial prescribing practices and educational needs. Among 140 junior doctors from 5 London hospitals, a third (34 %) reported prescribing primarily unsupervised, and two thirds (67 %) reported difficulties obtaining prescribing support outside of hours. 20 % stated not feeling confident in writing an antimicrobial prescription, but confidence was increased through having confirmatory diagnostic results (24) and obtaining advice from a senior doctor (26 %); whether this senior was from their own specialty, or an infection-specialist, varied significantly (p < 0.01) by experience. Only a small percentage (5-13 %; depending on number of years post-qualification) of participants stated their previous antimicrobial education was effective. 60 % of those in their first year post qualification reported wanting further education in antimicrobial prescribing, rising to 74 % among more experienced junior doctors. Specific areas of educational need identified were (i) principles of antimicrobial prescribing, (ii) diagnosis of infections, (iii) clinical review of patients with infections, (iv) prescribing in the context of antimicrobial resistance, and (v) laboratory testing and test results. A significant proportion of junior doctors report lone prescribing of antimicrobials in the context of low self-perceived confidence and knowledge in this field, and frequent difficulty in accessing help when necessary. Innovative training, targeting five specific areas identified through this needs assessment, is urgently needed by junior doctors practising in secondary care.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 144 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 143 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 25 17%
Researcher 19 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 10%
Student > Bachelor 8 6%
Student > Postgraduate 7 5%
Other 30 21%
Unknown 41 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 43 30%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 9 6%
Social Sciences 6 4%
Psychology 5 3%
Other 17 12%
Unknown 49 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 June 2020.
All research outputs
#7,486,475
of 22,884,315 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#2,549
of 7,691 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#117,693
of 336,882 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#70
of 214 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,884,315 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,691 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 336,882 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 214 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.