↓ Skip to main content

Using theory to explore facilitators and barriers to delayed prescribing in Australia: a qualitative study using the Theoretical Domains Framework and the Behaviour Change Wheel

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Primary Care, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
47 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
151 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Using theory to explore facilitators and barriers to delayed prescribing in Australia: a qualitative study using the Theoretical Domains Framework and the Behaviour Change Wheel
Published in
BMC Primary Care, February 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12875-017-0589-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lucy Sargent, Amanda McCullough, Chris Del Mar, John Lowe

Abstract

Delayed antibiotic prescribing reduces antibiotic use for acute respiratory infections in trials in general practice, but the uptake in clinical practice is low. The aim of the study was to identify facilitators and barriers to general practitioners' (GPs') use of delayed prescribing and to gain pharmacists' and the public's views about delayed prescribing in Australia. This study used the Theoretical Domains Framework and the Behaviour Change Wheel to explore facilitators and barriers to delayed prescribing in Australia. Forty-three semi-structured, face-to-face interviews with general practitioners, pharmacists and patients were conducted. Responses were coded into domains of the Theoretical Domains Framework, and specific criteria from the Behaviour Change Wheel were used to identify which domains were relevant to increasing the use of delayed prescribing by GPs. The interviews revealed nine key domains that influence GPs' use of delayed prescribing: knowledge; cognitive and interpersonal skills; memory, attention and decision-making processes; optimism; beliefs about consequences; intentions; goals; emotion; and social influences: GPs knew about delayed prescribing; however, they did not use it consistently, preferring to bring patients back for review and only using it with patients in a highly selective way. Pharmacists would support GPs and the public in delayed prescribing but would fill the prescription if people insisted. The public said they would delay taking their antibiotics if asked by their GP and given the right information on managing symptoms and when to take antibiotics. Using a theory-driven approach, we identified nine key domains that influence GPs' willingness to provide a delayed prescription to patients with an acute respiratory infection presenting to general practice. These data can be used to develop a structured intervention to change this behaviour and thus reduce antibiotic use for acute respiratory infections in general practice.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 151 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 151 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 31 21%
Researcher 24 16%
Student > Master 21 14%
Student > Bachelor 9 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 5%
Other 21 14%
Unknown 38 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 20 13%
Psychology 16 11%
Social Sciences 13 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 7 5%
Other 22 15%
Unknown 50 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 October 2017.
All research outputs
#20,660,571
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from BMC Primary Care
#1,954
of 2,359 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#327,734
of 431,921 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Primary Care
#40
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,359 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 431,921 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.