Prescription of antiviral drugs during the 2009 influenza pandemic: an observational study using electronic medical files of general practitioners in the Netherlands

BackgroundAfter the clinical impact of the A(H1N1) pdm09 virus was considered to be mild, treatment with antiviral drugs was recommended only to patients who were at risk for severe disease or who had a complicated course of influenza. We investigated to what extent antiviral prescriptions in primary care practices were in accordance with the recommendations, what proportion of patients diagnosed with influenza had been prescribed antiviral drugs, and to what extent prescriptions related to the stated indications for antiviral treatment.MethodsWe used data from routine electronic medical records of practices participating in the Netherlands Information Network of General Practice LINH in the period August - December 2009. We considered patient and practice characteristics, clinical diagnoses and drug prescriptions of all patients who contacted their general practitioner in the given period and who had been prescribed antiviral medication (n = 351) or were diagnosed with influenza (n = 3293).ResultsOf all antiviral prescriptions, 69% were in accordance with the recommendations. Only 5% of patients diagnosed with influenza were prescribed antiviral drugs. This percentage increased to 12% among influenza patients belonging to the designated high risk groups. On the other hand, 2.5% of influenza patients not at high risk of complications received antiviral treatment. In addition to the established high risk factors, the total number of drug prescriptions for a patient in this year was a determinant of antiviral prescriptions. Information on time since onset of symptoms and the clinical presentation of patients was not available.ConclusionsGeneral practitioners in the Netherlands have been restrictive in prescribing antiviral drugs during the influenza pandemic, even when patients met the criteria for antiviral treatment.

[1]  B. Bentsen International classification of primary care. , 1986, Scandinavian journal of primary health care.

[2]  M. Bouvy,et al.  Adherence to Oseltamivir Guidelines during Influenza Pandemic, the Netherlands , 2012, Emerging infectious diseases.

[3]  Siep Thomas,et al.  Attributes of clinical guidelines that influence use of guidelines in general practice: observational study , 1998, BMJ.

[4]  C. C. van den Wijngaard,et al.  Surveillance of hospitalisations for 2009 pandemic influenza A(H1N1) in the Netherlands, 5 June - 31 December 2009. , 2010, Euro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin.

[5]  A. Mill,et al.  Influenza A/H1N1v in pregnancy: an investigation of the characteristics and management of affected women and the relationship to pregnancy outcomes for mother and infant. , 2010, Health technology assessment.

[6]  D. D. de Bakker,et al.  Patient characteristics determine differences in the influenza vaccination rate more so than practice features. , 2002, Preventive medicine.

[7]  Kamaljit Singh,et al.  Oseltamivir overuse at a Chicago hospital during the 2009 influenza pandemic and the poor predictive value of influenza-like illness criteria , 2012, Scandinavian journal of infectious diseases.

[8]  P. Groenewegen,et al.  Vaccination of high-risk patients against influenza: impact on primary care contact rates during epidemics. Analysis of routinely collected data. , 2004, Vaccine.

[9]  M. Kretzschmar,et al.  The burden of 2009 pandemic influenza A(H1N1) in the Netherlands. , 2012, European journal of public health.

[10]  R. Stafford,et al.  Antiviral prescribing by office-based physicians during the 2009 H1N1 pandemic. , 2011, Annals of internal medicine.

[11]  G. Donker Continuous Morbidity Registration at Dutch Sentinel General Practice Network 2009 , 2011 .

[12]  Henks Lamberts,et al.  ICPC : international classification of primary care , 1987 .