Context: Antibiotic prescribing by physicians has gained due importance across the globe, mainly because of an increase in antibiotic usage, prevalence of infections, and drug resistances. Aims: The present study aimed to evaluate the prescribing pattern of antibiotics, their adherence to essential medicines list, disease conditions for which they were prescribed, and their adverse effects. Settings and Design: A cross-sectional prospective study was carried out in six inpatients departments (Surgery, Orthopedics, ENT, Ophthalmology, Medicine, and Pediatrics) of a 550-bed tertiary care hospital in Trivandrum, India for two months (July-August 2012). Institutional Research and Ethics Committee clearance were obtained prior to the study. Materials and Methods: The data were collected in a predesigned performa from the medical case sheets, drug charts, and laboratory investigations of 100 in-patients. The enrolled patients were observed from admission till discharge. Descriptive statistics were applied to the collected data and analyzed using Microsoft Excel software. Results: The mean duration of hospitalization among the study population was 5.48 (±4.28) days. Of the 410 medicines prescribed, antibiotics contributed 151 (36.8%). They were mostly indicated for respiratory infections, and the most common antibiotic was Beta-lactams (91 (60.2%). Interestingly, 89 antibiotics (60%) were administered as injections. About 70 (46%) of the antibiotics were prescribed without any combinations. The adherences to World Health Organization's essential medicines list were 122 (81%). A total of seven adverse drug reactions were reported in the current study. Of which, none were serious, and five (70%) were cutaneous reactions. Conclusions: Of the 100 patients analyzed from six in-patient departments, it was observed that the hospital physicians prescribed antibiotics more rationally with no banned drugs and less newer drugs. Rational prescribing of antibiotics would help avoid polypharmacy and prevent drug resistances.

Background: Pediatricians following clinical practice guidelines for tobacco intervention (“Ask, Advise, and Refer” [AAR]) can motivate parents to reduce child tobacco smoke exposure (TSE). However, brief clinic interventions are unable to provide the more intensive, evidence-based behavioral treatments that facilitate the knowledge, skills, and confidence that parents need to both reduce child TSE and quit smoking. We hypothesized that a multilevel treatment model integrating pediatric clinic-level AAR with individual-level, telephone counseling would promote greater long-term (12-month) child TSE reduction and parent smoking cessation than clinic-level AAR alone. Methods: Pediatricians were trained to implement AAR with parents during clinic visits and reminded via prompts embedded in electronic health records. Following AAR, parents were randomized to intervention (AAR + counseling) or nutrition education attention control (AAR + control). Child TSE and parent quit status were bioverified. Results: Participants (n = 327) were 83% female, 83% African American, and 79% below the poverty level. Child TSE (urine cotinine) declined significantly in both conditions from baseline to 12 months (p = 0.001), with no between-group differences. The intervention had a statistically significant effect on 12-month bioverified quit status (p = 0.029): those in the intervention group were 2.47 times more likely to quit smoking than those in the control. Child age was negatively associated with 12-month log-cotinine (p = 0.01), whereas nicotine dependence was positively associated with 12-month log-cotinine levels (p = 0.001) and negatively associated with bioverified quit status (p = 0.006). Conclusions: Pediatrician advice alone may be sufficient to increase parent protections of children from TSE. Integrating clinic-level intervention with more intensive individual-level smoking intervention is necessary to promote parent cessation.

BackgroundSecondhand smoke exposure (SHSe) harms children’s health, yet effective interventions to reduce child SHSe in the home and car have proven difficult to operationalize in pediatric practice. A multilevel intervention combining pediatric healthcare providers’ advice with behavioral counseling and navigation to pharmacological cessation aids may improve SHSe control in pediatric populations.Methods/designThis trial uses a randomized, two-group design with three measurement periods: pre-intervention, end of treatment and 12-month follow-up. Smoking parents of children < 11-years-old are recruited from pediatric clinics. The clinic-level intervention includes integrating tobacco intervention guideline prompts into electronic health record screens. The prompts guide providers to ask all parents about child SHSe, advise about SHSe harms, and refer smokers to cessation resources. After receiving clinic intervention, eligible parents are randomized to receive: (a) a 3-month telephone-based behavioral counseling intervention designed to promote reduction in child SHSe, parent smoking cessation, and navigation to access nicotine replacement therapy or cessation medication or (b) an attention control nutrition education intervention. Healthcare providers and assessors are blind to group assignment. Cotinine is used to bioverify child SHSe (primary outcome) and parent quit status.DiscussionThis study tests an innovative multilevel approach to reducing child SHSe. The approach is sustainable, because clinics can easily integrate the tobacco intervention prompts related to “ask, advise, and refer” guidelines into electronic health records and refer smokers to free evidence-based behavioral counseling interventions, such as state quitlines.Trial registrationNCT01745393 (clinicaltrials.gov).

The results indicate that the integration of clinic- and individual-level smoking interventions produces improved TSE and cessation outcomes relative to standalone clinic AAR intervention. Moreover, this study was among the first in which researchers demonstrated success in embedding AAR decision aids into electronic health records and seamlessly facilitated TSE intervention into routine clinic practice.

Improving smoking intervention trial retention in underserved populations remains a public health priority. Low retention rates undermine clinical advancements that could reduce health disparities. To examine the effects of recruitment strategies on participant retention among 279 low-income, maternal smokers who initiated treatment in a 16-week behavioral counseling trial to reduce child secondhand smoke exposure (SHSe). Participants were recruited using either reactive strategies or methods that included proactive strategies. Logistic regression analysis was used to test associations among retention and recruitment method in the context of other psychosocial and sociodemographic factors known to relate to retention. Backwards stepwise procedures determined the most parsimonious solution. Ninetyfour percent of participants recruited with proactive + reactive methods were retained through end of treatment compared to 74.7% of reactive-recruited participants. Retention likelihood was five times greater if participants were recruited with proactive + reactive strategies rather than reactive recruitment alone (odds ration [OR]=5.36; confidence interval [CI], 2.31-12.45). Greater knowledge of SHS consequences (OR=1.58; CI, 1.07-2.34) was another significant factor retained in the final LR model. Proactive recruitment may improve retention among underserved smokers in behavioral intervention trials. Identifying factors influencing retention may improve the success of recruitment strategies in future trials, in turn, enhancing the impact of smoking interventions.