Explaining socioeconomic inequalities in antibiotic prescribing for common infections in English primary care: a population-based study
Yang, M.; Nguyen, V. N.; Walker, A. S.; Robotham, J. V.; van Leeuwen, E.; Hayward, G.; Butler, C. C.; Pouwels, K. B.
Show abstract
OBJECTIVES To quantify socioeconomic inequalities in antibiotic prescribing for common infections in primary care, and assess whether these inequalities arise from differences in consultation frequency, prescribing behaviour, or variation in vaccination uptake, smoking, and body mass index. DESIGN Population based cohort study. SETTING Primary care data from Clinical Practice Research Datalink, England. PARTICIPANTS 17,195,399 children and adults estimated to have been registered with a general practice in 2019. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Antibiotic prescribing rates (prescriptions per person-year), consultation rates (consultations per person-year), and probability of receiving an antibiotic prescription following consultation. RESULTS Higher deprivation was associated with higher antibiotic prescribing rates for most respiratory tract indications. In children, prescribing rates were 44.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] 41.9% to 47.7%) higher for upper respiratory tract infections and 47.6% (95% CI 44.2% to 51.3%) higher for lower respiratory tract infections in the most versus least deprived twentile. In adults, prescribing rates for lower respiratory tract infections were 22.7% (95% CI 21.4% to 24.1%) higher in the most deprived twentile. Prescribing rates for other indications showed weak, U-shaped, or negative associations with deprivation. Prescribing inequalities were primarily driven by inequalities in consultation rates rather than probability of receiving antibiotics once consulted. Lower influenza vaccination uptake partly accounted for higher consultation rates for respiratory infections among more deprived children, while smoking prevalence contributed to inequalities among adults. CONCLUSIONS Socioeconomic inequalities in antibiotic prescribing vary by indication type and are largely explained by consultation frequency. Reducing inequalities may require interventions that decrease the need to consult, e.g. improving influenza vaccination coverage in children and reducing smoking among adults, rather than focussing solely on prescribing behaviour.
Matching journals
The top 9 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Trends in inequalities in avoidable hospitalisations across the COVID-19 pandemic: A cohort study of 23.5 million people in England 93%
- Inequalities in healthcare disruptions during the Covid-19 pandemic: Evidence from 12 UK population-based longitudinal studies 93%
- Identifying markers of health-seeking behaviour and healthcare access in UK electronic health records 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Overall and cause-specific hospitalisation and death after COVID-19 hospitalisation in England: cohort study in OpenSAFELY using linked primary care, secondary care and death registration data 92%
- CoMix: Changes in social contacts as measured by the contact survey during the COVID-19 pandemic in England between March 2020 and March 2021 91%
- Factors associated with excess all-cause mortality in the first wave of COVID-19 pandemic in the UK: a time-series analysis using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Clinical coding of long COVID in primary care 2020-2023 in a cohort of 19 million adults: an OpenSAFELY analysis 92%
- COVID-19 among migrants, refugees, and internally displaced persons: systematic review, meta-analysis and qualitative synthesis of the global empirical literature 90%
- High prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in care homes affected by COVID-19; a prospective cohort study in England 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- Determinants of pre-vaccination antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2: a population-based longitudinal study (COVIDENCE UK) 93%
- Relation of severe COVID-19 in Scotland to transmission-related factors and risk conditions eligible for shielding support: REACT-SCOT case-control study 91%
- Health impacts of takeaway management zones around schools in six different local authorities across England: a public health modelling study using PRIMEtime 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- Comparison of COVID-19 outcomes among shielded and non-shielded populations: A general population cohort study of 1.3 million 93%
- Ethnic disparities in hospitalisation and hospital-outcomes during the second wave of COVID-19 infection in east London 92%
- COVID-19 due to the B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant compared to B.1.1.7 (Alpha) variant of SARS-CoV-2: two prospective observational cohort studies 92%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.