Abstract
Objectives Antibiotic overuse is one of the main drivers of antimicrobial resistance (AMR), especially in low and middle-income countries. This study aimed to gain an understanding of perceptions, views, and practices regarding AMR, antibiotic prescribing, and stewardship (AMS) among hospital physicians in Jakarta, Indonesia.
Design cross-sectional, self-administered questionnaire-based survey, with descriptive statistics, exploratory factor analysis (EFA) to identify distinct underlying constructs in the dataset, and multivariable linear regression of factor scores to analyse physician subgroups.
Setting Six public and private general hospitals in Jakarta in 2019.
Participants 1007 of 1896 (53.1% response rate) antibiotic prescribing physicians.
Results EFA identified six latent factors (overall Crohnbach’s α=0.85): awareness of AMS activities; awareness of AMS purpose; views regarding rational antibiotic prescribing; confidence in antibiotic prescribing decisions; perception of AMR as a significant problem; and immediate actions to contain AMR. Physicians acknowledged the significance of AMR and contributing factors, rational antibiotic prescribing, and purpose and usefulness of AMS. However, this conflicted with reported suboptimal local hospital practices, such as room cleaning, hand hygiene and staff education, and views regarding antibiotic decision-making. These included insufficiently applying AMS principles and utilising microbiology, lack of confidence in prescribing decisions, and defensive prescribing due to pervasive diagnostic uncertainty, fear of patient deterioration or because patients insisted. Physicians’ factor scores differed across hospitals, departments, work experience and medical hierarchy.
Conclusions AMS implementation in Indonesian hospitals is challenged by institutional, contextual and diagnostic vulnerabilities, resulting in externalising AMR instead of recognising it as a local problem. Appropriate recognition of the contextual determinants of antibiotic prescribing decision-making will be critical to change physicians’ attitudes and develop context-specific AMS interventions.
Strengths and limitations of this study
The self-developed questionnaire in this study identified a relevant set of attributes through a factor analysis optimization process, with adequate content, face and construct validity and internal reliability. This study adds important value in the absence of adequately validated instruments regarding antimicrobial resistance and stewardship, with particular applicability for LMIC.
This study had a large, varied respondent sample and high response rate among physicians at six public and private hospitals in Jakarta, Indonesia, and identified differences between physicians across hospitals, departments, work experience and medical hierarchy, which can guide priority-setting and tailoring of stewardship interventions.
However, non-participation and the convenient hospital sample could have introduced selection bias, and the data are not necessarily representative for Jakarta or Indonesia.
Factor analysis is based on using a “heuristic”, which leaves room to more than one interpretation of the same data and cannot identify causality.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This work was funded by the Wellcome Trust, UK (106680/Z/14/Z). RL is supported by an OUCRU Prize Studentship and a Nuffield Dept of Medicine Tropical Network Fund DPhil Bursary.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The research ethics committee of the Faculty of Medicine University of Indonesia (1364/UN2.F1/ETIK/2018) and the Oxford Tropical Research Ethics Committee (559-18) approved the study, with additional permission from hospital management.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
De-identified data are available upon reasonable request via the corresponding author, after written permission has been obtained from the lead investigators.
