Antibiotic prescribing in remote versus face-to-face consultations for acute respiratory infections in primary care in England: an observational study using target maximum likelihood estimation

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to an ongoing increase in the use of remote consultations in general practice in England. Although the evidence is limited, there are concerns that the increase in remote consultations could lead to more antibiotic prescribing. METHODS: In this cohort study, we used patient-level primary care data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink to estimate the association between consultation mode (remote versus face-to-face) and antibiotic prescribing in England for acute respiratory infections (ARI) between April 2021 and March 2022. Eligibility criteria were applied at both practice-level and patient-level. 400 practices in England were sampled at random and then 600,000 patients were randomly sampled from the eligible patients (whose sex was recorded). Consultations for acute respiratory infections were identified. All antibiotic prescriptions were included, with the exception of antituberculosis drugs and antileprotic drugs, as identified through chapter 5.1 of the British National Formulary. The CPRD Aurum data was linked to the COVID-19 ONS infection survey by region. All analyses were done at the individual level. Repeated consultations from the same patient within 7 days were grouped together. We used targeted maximum likelihood estimation, a causal machine learning method with adjustment for infection type and patient-level, clinician-level and practice-level factors. FINDINGS: There were 45,997 ARI consultations (34,555 unique patients) within the study period, of which 28,127 were remote and 17,870 were face-to-face. For children, 48% of consultations were remote and, for adults, 66% were remote. For children, 42% of remote and 43% of face-to-face consultations led to an antibiotic prescription; the equivalent values for adults were 52% and 42%, respectively. After adjustment with TMLE, adults with a remote consultation had 23% (odds ratio [OR] 1.23, 95% CI: 1.18–1.29) higher chance of being prescribed antibiotics than if they had been seen face-to-face. We found no significant association between consultation mode and antibiotic prescribing in children (OR 1.04 95% CI: 0.98–1.11). INTERPRETATION: The higher rates of antibiotic prescribing in remote consultations for adults are cause for concern. We see no significant difference in antibiotic prescribing between consultation mode for children. These findings should inform antimicrobial stewardship activities for health-care professionals and policy makers. Future research should examine differences in guideline-compliance between remote and face-to-face consultations to understand the factors driving antibiotic prescribing in different consultation modes. FUNDING: None.