Objectives: Pre-COVID-19 pandemic, patients who attended the emergency department (ED) for upper respiratory tract infection (URTI) were more likely to receive antibiotics if they expected them. These expectations could have changed with the change in health-seeking behaviour during the pandemic. We assessed the factors associated with antibiotics expectation and receipt for uncomplicated URTI patients in four Singapore EDs during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study on adult patients with URTI from March 2021 to March 2022 in four Singapore EDs and assessed the determinants of antibiotics expectation and receipt using multivariable logistic regression models. We also assessed the reasons patients expect antibiotics during their ED visit. Results: Among 681 patients, 31.0% expected antibiotics while 8.7% received antibiotics during their ED visit. Factors (adjusted odds ratio [95% confidence interval]) that significantly influenced expectation for antibiotics include: 1) prior consultation for current illness with (6.56 [3.30-13.11]) or without (1.50 [1.01-2.23]) antibiotics prescribed; 2) anticipation for COVID-19 test (1.56 [1.01-2.41]); and 3) poor (2.16 [1.26-3.68]) to moderate (2.26 [1.33-3.84]) knowledge on antibiotics use and resistance. Patients expecting antibiotics were 10.6 times (10.64 [5.34-21.17]) more likely to receive antibiotics. Those with tertiary education were twice (2.20 [1.09-4.43]) as likely to receive antibiotics. Conclusion: In conclusion, patients with URTI who expected antibiotics to be prescribed remained more likely to receive it during the COVID-19 pandemic. This highlights the need for more public education on the non-necessity for antibiotics for URTI and COVID-19 to address the problem of antibiotic resistance. (c) 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of International Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Introduction: The majority of patients with COVID-19 infection do not progress to pneumonia. We report emergency department (ED)-specific variables and evaluate their predictive performance on diagnosis of pneumonia, intensive care unit (ICU) admission and death. Methods: This was a retrospective, single-centre cohort study of confirmed COVID-19 patients admitted to a Singapore tertiary hospital. Primary outcome was diagnosis of COVID-19 pneumonia. Secondary outcomes were ICU admission and/or death. Multivariate logistic regression was used to analyse the predictive performance of ED-specific variables. Accuracy of continuous variables was measured by area under receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Results: 294 patients were included. Patients with pneumonia were older (52.0 years, P < 0.001) and had higher C-reactive protein (CRP; 33.8 mg/L, P < 0.001). Patients with indeterminate chest radiograph (CRX) findings were at risk of pneumonia vs. patients with normal CRX (37.5% vs. 4.3%, P < 0.001). Patients admitted to ICU were older (60.0 years, P < 0.001) and had higher CRP (40.0 mg/L, P < 0.001). Diagnosis of COVID-19 pneumonia was associated with ICU admission and death (30.0% vs 0.39%, P < 0.001). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that age (aOR 1.07, P = 0.049), CRP (aOR 1.05, P = 0.006) and CRX findings (aOR 50.00, P < 0.001) had increased odds of pneumonia. ROC curve analysis showed that CRP of 23.3 mg/L was the optimal cut-off for predicting pneumonia. Conclusion: Older age, higher CRP and CRX findings are associated with COVID-19 pneumonia, ICU admission and death. Prospective studies should be undertaken to validate these findings.

Background: Antimicrobial stewardship programs attempting to optimize antibiotic therapy and clinical outcomes mainly focus on inpatient and outpatient settings. The lack of antimicrobial stewardship program studies in the emergency department (ED) represents a gap in tackling the problem of antimicrobial resistance as EDs treat a substantial number of upper respiratory tract infection cases throughout the year. Objective: We intend to implement two evidence-based interventions: (1) patient education and (2) providing physician feedback on their prescribing rates. We will incorporate evidence from a literature review and contextualizing the interventions based on findings from a local qualitative study. Methods: Our study uses a quasi-experimental design to evaluate the effects of interventions over time in the EDs of 4 public hospitals in Singapore. We will include an initial control period of 18 months. In the next 6 months, we will randomize 2 EDs to receive 1 intervention (ie, patient education) and the other 2 EDs to receive the alternative intervention (ie, physician feedback). All EDs will receive the second intervention in the subsequent 6 months on top of the ongoing intervention. Data will be collected for another 6 months to assess the persistence of the intervention effects. The information leaflets will be handed to patients at the EDs before they consult with the physician, while feedback to individual physicians by senior doctors is in the form of electronic text messages. The feedback will contain the physicians’ antibiotic prescribing rate compared with the departments’ overall antibiotic prescribing rate and a bite-size message on good antibiotic prescribing practices. Results: We will analyze the data using segmented regression with difference-in-difference estimation to account for concurrent cluster comparisons. Conclusions: Our proposed study assesses the effectiveness of evidence-based, context-specific interventions to optimize antibiotic prescribing in EDs. These interventions are aligned with Singapore’s national effort to tackle antimicrobial resistance and can be scaled up if successful. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05451863; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05451836

BACKGROUND Antimicrobial stewardship programs attempting to optimize antibiotic therapy and clinical outcomes mainly focus on inpatient and outpatient settings. The lack of antimicrobial stewardship program studies in the emergency department (ED) represents a gap in tackling the problem of antimicrobial resistance as EDs treat a substantial number of upper respiratory tract infection cases throughout the year. OBJECTIVE We intend to implement two evidence-based interventions: (1) patient education and (2) providing physician feedback on their prescribing rates. We will incorporate evidence from a literature review and contextualizing the interventions based on findings from a local qualitative study. METHODS Our study uses a quasi-experimental design to evaluate the effects of interventions over time in the EDs of 4 public hospitals in Singapore. We will include an initial control period of 18 months. In the next 6 months, we will randomize 2 EDs to receive 1 intervention (ie, patient education) and the other 2 EDs to receive the alternative intervention (ie, physician feedback). All EDs will receive the second intervention in the subsequent 6 months on top of the ongoing intervention. Data will be collected for another 6 months to assess the persistence of the intervention effects. The information leaflets will be handed to patients at the EDs before they consult with the physician, while feedback to individual physicians by senior doctors is in the form of electronic text messages. The feedback will contain the physicians’ antibiotic prescribing rate compared with the departments’ overall antibiotic prescribing rate and a bite-size message on good antibiotic prescribing practices. RESULTS We will analyze the data using segmented regression with difference-in-difference estimation to account for concurrent cluster comparisons. CONCLUSIONS Our proposed study assesses the effectiveness of evidence-based, context-specific interventions to optimize antibiotic prescribing in EDs. These interventions are aligned with Singapore’s national effort to tackle antimicrobial resistance and can be scaled up if successful. CLINICALTRIAL ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05451863; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05451836 INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT DERR1-10.2196/50417