Objective: The aim of this study was to describe and characterize the prescription of antibiotics for urinary tract infection (UTI) in general practice in Denmark and to evaluate compliance with current recommendations. Design: National registry-based study Setting: Danish general practice Patients: 267.539 patients who redeemed a prescription for antibiotics with the clinical indication UTI at community pharmacies between July 1^st 2012 and June 31^st 2013. Main outcome measures: Antibiotics prescribed for 1) acute lower UTI, 2) acute upper UTI and 3) recurrent UTI presented as amount of prescriptions, number of treatments per 1000 inhabitants per day (TID) and defined daily doses per 1000 inhabitants per day (DID). Results: A total of 507.532 prescriptions were issued to 267.539 patients during the one year study period, representing 2.35 DID. Acute lower UTI was the most common reason for prescription of antibiotics (89.5%) followed by recurrent UTI (8.4%). The majority of the prescriptions were issued to people above 60 year old (57.6%). Pivmecillinam was the most commonly prescribed antibiotic in acute lower (45.8%) and acute upper (63.3%) UTI. Trimethroprim was the most commonly prescribed antibiotic in recurrent UTI (45.9%). Prescription of quinolones increased with increasing patient-age (p = <.0001). Conclusion: Compliance with current Danish recommendations was moderately high. Pivmecillinam is the first line antibiotic for the management of acute lower and upper UTI, and trimethroprim is the first line option of recurrent UTI. A high proportion of the antibiotic prescriptions were issued in the elderly population including a relatively high prescription rate of quinolones.

Escherichia coli is the most common pathogen causing Urinary Tract Infections (UTI). Data from the current National Surveillance program in Denmark (DANMAP) may not accurately represent the prevalence of resistant E. coli in primary care, because only urine samples from complicated cases may be forwarded to the microbiological departments at hospitals for diagnostic examination. The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of resistant E. coli to the most commonly used antimicrobial agents in primary care in a consecutive sample of patients from general practice. Observational study carried out from December 2014 to December 2015. Thirty-nine general practices from The Capital Region of Denmark included adult patients with urinary tract symptoms and suspected UTI. All urine samples were sent to the central laboratory Statens Serum Institut (SSI). Significant bacteriuria was interpreted according to the European Urinalysis Standards. Susceptibility testing was performed and interpreted according to the European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST) standards. From the 39 general practices 505 patients were recruited. Completed data were obtained from 485 (96%) patients. According to the European Urinalysis Standards, 261 (54%) patients had positive bacteriuria. The most common uropathogen in patients with uncomplicated (uUTI) and complicated (cUTI) urinary tract infection was E. coli 105 (69%) and 76 (70%), respectively. Eighty-two (45%) of 181 E. coli isolates were resistant to at least one of the tested antibiotics and 50 out of 82 isolates were resistant to two or more antimicrobial agents. The highest resistance-rate was found against ampicillin 34% (95% CI 24;42) in uUTI and 36% (24;46) in cUTI. There were no differences in the distribution of resistance between uncomplicated and complicated cases. The prevalence of resistance was similar to the one reported in DANMAP 2014. In E. coli from uUTI there is high resistance rates to antimicrobial agents commonly used in primary care. There was no difference in the distribution of resistant E. coli in suspected uUTI vs cUTI. In Denmark, data from the National Surveillance program DANMAP can guide the decision for choice of antibiotic in patients with suspected UTI seeking care in primary care. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02249273 .

Choice of urine sampling technique in urinary tract infection may impact diagnostic accuracy and thus lead to possible over- or undertreatment. Currently no evidencebased consensus exists regarding correct sampling technique of urine from women with symptoms of urinary tract infection in primary care. The aim of this study was to determine the accuracy of urine culture from different sampling-techniques in symptomatic non-pregnant women in primary care. A systematic review was conducted by searching Medline and Embase for clinical studies conducted in primary care using a randomized or paired design to compare the result of urine culture obtained with two or more collection techniques in adult, female, non-pregnant patients with symptoms of urinary tract infection. We evaluated quality of the studies and compared accuracy based on dichotomized outcomes. We included seven studies investigating urine sampling technique in 1062 symptomatic patients in primary care. Mid-stream-clean-catch had a positive predictive value of 0.79 to 0.95 and a negative predictive value close to 1 compared to sterile techniques. Two randomized controlled trials found no difference in infection rate between mid-stream-clean-catch, mid-stream-urine and random samples. At present, no evidence suggests that sampling technique affects the accuracy of the microbiological diagnosis in non-pregnant women with symptoms of urinary tract infection in primary care. However, the evidence presented is in-direct and the difference between mid-stream-clean-catch, mid-stream-urine and random samples remains to be investigated in a paired design to verify the present findings.

Background Behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia are frequently experienced in the nursing home setting and place a substantial burden on patients, relatives, and nursing home staff. Despite guidelines recommending non-pharmacological treatments, psychotropic drugs are often prescribed to address these symptoms. This is the case despite their effects being limited, and there being a risk of side effects and adverse events for the patient. Several studies have aimed to reduce the use of psychotropic drugs, with varying results. The reasons behind these variations are not well understood. Objectives The objective of this systematic review was to investigate which factors nursing home general practitioners and nursing home staff experience as barriers or facilitators when attempting to deprescribe psychotropic drugs in nursing home residents. Methods We searched PubMed, EMBASE, psycINFO, Web of Science, and CINAHL between April and September 2020. An inductive method using thematic analysis of the qualitative findings was applied for the derivation of themes. Quantitative studies were included but described descriptively and separately. Results Of 8204 unique records, 14 studies were included in the review. Of these, nine were interview or focus group studies and five were survey studies. Thematic analysis resulted in five major themes identified as either facilitators or barriers or both: (1) ‘Operationality and routines’; (2) ‘Lack of resources and qualifications’; (3) ‘Patient-related outcomes’, which points to a strong belief in negative patient-related outcomes of discontinuation and a downplay of side effects of the medication; (4) ‘Policies’, including support and buy-in from nursing home leadership; and (5) ‘Collaboration’ between physicians and nursing home staff. Themes 1 and 4 consist of facilitators. Theme 2 consists of barriers. Theme 3 and 5 consist of both facilitators and barriers. Evaluation of closed-ended questions from the surveys supported the findings. Conclusions Deprescribing psychotropic drugs used for behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia in nursing home residents is challenging. Resources need to be in place for deprescribing, as well as there being a focus on the positive patient-related outcomes of doing so. Managerial support, staff routines, and interprofessional collaboration are some factors facilitating the process, in addition to there being routines and systematic procedures in place allowing for operationality and a common understanding. Addressing these barriers and facilitators is necessary to ensure that deprescribing can be understood as meaningful and pursued among healthcare professionals in the nursing home setting.

Objective: To study 1) whether the accuracy of point-of-care (POC) urine tests (dipstick, phase-contrast microscopy and culture) differs when performed on first-void urine (FVU) compared to mid-stream urine (MSU), and 2) if a delay of analysis up to four hours affects the accuracy of POC tests when performed on urine from symptomatic of urinary tract infection (UTI), non-pregnant women in general practice. Design: Prospective diagnostic study using paired samples. Setting/Intervention: Three general practices in Copenhagen. Each woman delivered FVU and MSU samples from the same void. As a reference standard, 8 ml of MSU was sent for culture at the Microbiology Department. Patients: 117 women with one or more symptoms of UTI. Main outcome measures: Sensitivity, specificity and agreement with the reference standard of FVU and MSU with different time delays (zero vs. one vs. four hours) as compared to reference standard (MSU at time zero in boric acid tubes). Results: All three POC tests performed on MSU were significantly more in agreement with the reference than when performed on FVU when analysis was done immediately. The error rate was 16% for MSU vs. 23% for FVU with POC culture, 27% vs. 40% with microscopy and 25% vs. 33% with dipstick testing. Delay of analysis up to four hours did not decrease agreement with the reference. Conclusion/Implication: MSU samples should be used in general practice for optimal accuracy of POC tests. Analysis can be delayed up to four hours.

Introduction: Polypharmacy is a common concern, especially in the older population. In some countries more that 50% of all individuals over 60 receive five or more drugs, most often due to multimorbidity and increased longevity. However, polypharmacy is associated with multiple adverse events, and more medication may not always be the answer. The terms “appropriate” and “inappropriate” are often used to distinguish between “much” and “too much” medications in relation to polypharmacy in research and practice, but no explicit definition exists to describe what these terms encompass. The aim of this review is to unfold the different understandings of and perspectives on (in)appropriate polypharmacy and suggest a framework for further research and practice. Method: A scoping review was conducted using the framework of Arksey and O’Malley and Levac et al. Pubmed, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Cochrane database, Scopus and Web of Science were searched for references in English, Danish, Norwegian and Swedish using the search string “Polypharmacy” AND “Appropriate” OR “Inappropriate”. Data was extracted on author information, aims and objectives, methodology, study population and setting, country of origin, main findings and implications, and all text including the words “appropriate,” “inappropriate,” and “polypharmacy.” Qualitative meaning condensation analysis was used and data charted using descriptive and thematic analysis. Results: Of 3982 references, a total of 92 references were included in the review. Most references were from 2016-2021, from fields related to medicine or pharmacy, and occurred within primary and secondary healthcare settings. Based on the qualitative analysis, a framework were assembled consisting of Context, three domains (Standardization, Practices and Values & Concerns) and Patient Perspective. Conclusion: Inappropriate polypharmacy is a concept loaded by its heterogeneity and the usefulness of a single definition is doubtful. Instead, the framework suggested in this article representing different dimensions of inappropriate polypharmacy may serve as an initial strategy for focusing research and practice on polypharmacy in old age.