Utilization of remote e-prescription (Anat) in Saudi Arabia during COVID-19: Factors associated with primary adherence and antibiotic prescription
Abstract
Background
The COVID-19 pandemic has affected healthcare systems globally. Various health care technologies have been used to mitigate the risk of disease transmission. Telemedicine is one such technology, and remote consulting and prescribing comprise one of its key aspects. In Saudi Arabia, telephone health services have been widely used through the free Medical Consultation Call Center (937). This platform facilitates medical consultations for all citizens, residents, and visitors. After consultations, healthcare providers are able to issue authenticated e-prescriptions using the Anat platform.
Objectives
To explore the utilization of the Anat remote prescription system in Saudi Arabia during the COVID-19 pandemic and to identify the factors associated with antibiotic prescription and primary medication adherence.
Methods
This retrospective analysis included data from the Anat e‑prescription system using a stratified random sample of 25000 prescriptions issued in Saudi Arabia in 2020. Predictive factors related to the patients, practitioners, and prescriptions were identified through bivariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses.
Results
Out of 25,000 e-prescriptions, 8885 were dispensed, resulting in a 35.5% primary medication adherence rate. The significant predictors of primary adherence were children, respiratory diseases, and antibacterial drugs. In addition, antibiotics made up 32.1% of the e-prescriptions. The prescription of antibiotics was significantly associated with male sex, children, genitourinary system diseases, and being treated by radiologists.
Conclusions
Almost two thirds 62.2% of e-prescriptions were undispensed, with antibiotic eprescriptions at 32.1%. Findings emphasize the need to enhance primary medication adherence and antibiotic prescription interventions. These findings could aid decision-makers in improving patient-centered e-prescribing practices.
Introduction
The 2019 Coronavirus pandemic outbreak has increased the burden on healthcare systems around the world.1,2 Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is an infectious disease caused by a novel Coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2).3,4 Currently, COVID-19 is considered the leading cause of death worldwide, according to the WHO.5 In 2021, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) ranked 42nd out of 221 countries in the number of COVID-19 cases, with a prevalence of ∼392,000 confirmed cases and 6690 deaths.5 The first wave of COVID-19 started in Saudi Arabia in March 2020.6 In response, the government has taken various measures to contain the spread of the virus, including closing borders, suspending international flights, and implementing strict protocols for public places. The country also scaled up its healthcare infrastructure to ensure adequate treatment and care for COVID-19 patients.4,7,8 Due to the high number of Coronavirus cases and deaths, healthcare delivery methods have changed, as have the ways patients communicate with their caregivers.9,10
A variety of health technologies have been used to mitigate the risk of pandemic transmission, and telemedicine is one such technology.11 Telemedicine provides medical services remotely using information technologies. Originally, the term “telemedicine” was used to refer to the process of virtual interaction between the healthcare provider and the patient.12,13 It has then transformed medical service delivery by introducing various healthcare applications and services to patients.14 Remote prescribing is one example, where a physician orders medications online in the absence of in-person visits at the clinic.15 In response to the COVID-19 crisis, most in-person visits have been restricted to reduce the risk of viral transmission.15,16 Consequently, remote prescription has become standard practice in some countries, such as the United Kingdom,15 to reduce hospital visits and clinic wait times.15,17 This telehealth solution is usually provided by telemedicine services, which include patient consultations via telephone, video, or online.15
Despite the increase in remote prescribing, patients still have concerns about its safety and effectiveness.18,19 Primary non-adherence to prescribed medications is a challenge in pharmacological treatment.20 Primary adherence occurs when a patient successfully fills the first medication prescription within a specified number of days after the prescription is issued.21 In contrast, secondary adherence occurs when the patient successfully refills their prescription within a specified number of days after the dispensing of the first prescription.21 The timely initiation of medication is a critical step for long-term success of therapeutic outcomes and disease control.22 As the patient is examined virtually, remote prescribing may lead to unintended consequences, such as overprescribing, especially antibiotics.19,23,24 An additional limitation is the inability to accurately diagnose the patient's condition due to restricted access to the patient's medical information, particularly during the initial consultation.15
In Saudi Arabia, the Saudi Ministry of Health (MOH) has introduced telemedicine services to improve the quality of healthcare. These include telephone health services through the Medical Consultation Call Center (937), online medical consultation (Seha Mobile Application), and electronic prescribing through the Anat platform.25–30 The e- prescription system in Saudi Arabia started to grow significantly due to the government's initiatives to promote digital healthcare services. The country's healthcare system is adopting advanced technologies, including e-prescriptions such as Anat e-prescribing system, to improve patient care and reduce medication errors.25–31 Anat system is an online platform managed by the Saudi MOH and the Saudi Commission for Health Specialties (SCFHS). It is developed by Lean Business Services, a government-owned company operating under the Saudi MOH, which offers e-services to healthcare providers, including electronic prescriptions.28–30
Anat system allows physicians to electronically initiate prescriptions for patients after a telephone consultation through 937 call center or an online medical consultation Seha Mobile Application. These e-prescriptions are then sent directly to private pharmacies, where patients can collect them in person for a fee.28–30 The system was designed to streamline dispensing medications, reduce waste, and ensure medication availability to all patients throughout the Kingdom, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic.28–30
Objective
The study aims to explore the utilization of the Anat remote prescription system in Saudi Arabia during the COVID-19 pandemic and to identify the factors associated with antibiotic prescription and primary medication adherence.
Methods
Study design and setting
We conducted a retrospective analysis of remote e-prescriptions issued in Saudi Arabia during the period of January 2020 to December 2020, which coincided with the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in the country.6 During this period, the only virus in circulation was the novel Coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2). The remote e-prescriptions were obtained through the medical consultation call center (937), which provides free medical consultations to Saudi citizens, residents, and visitors, and dispensed by the electronic prescription system (Anat) platform. Following the consultation, the provider can issue an authenticated e-prescription via the Anat platform, allowing the patient to purchase these medications in person from a private pharmacy where the patient can receive the prescription for a fee.
Ethical approvals were granted by the King Abdullah International Medical Research Center (IRB number H-01-R-005) and The General Department of Research and Studies of the MOH in Saudi Arabia (IRB number H-01-R-009).
Data source
Data were requested from the Saudi MOH and Lean Business Services for e-prescriptions issued in 2020 through the 937 consultation service, which generated a total of 156,417 e-prescriptions. The data analyzed in this study included a stratified random sample of 25,000 e-prescriptions. Stratified random sampling is a method that divides a population into subgroups based on shared characteristics called strata and then selects a random sample from each stratum.32 The sample was stratified by the research office at Lean Business Services, and stratification was done using Alteryx software. Alteryx Analytics Automation Platform is a propriety product to automate data preparation and modeling processes.33 For this study, stratification, randomization, and sampling tools within Alteryx were used. To ensure the representativeness of the sample, e-prescriptions were first stratified by months. Thus, a sample from each month was extracted based on e-prescriptions distribution from the total e-prescriptions. Second, each stratification was further stratified by patient age group and gender.
Data cleaning
The patient demographic characteristics were categorized as age, gender, nationality, and diagnosis. The patient diagnosis was coded according to the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM). The chronic diseases were categorized by the researchers as chronic disease and non-chronic disease according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Data on the practitioners’ medical specialties were extracted and categorized according to the SCFHS.34
The prescription issue dates were categorized into three stages in line with the precautionary measures taken by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic. These included the pre-crisis stage (January 1 to March 1), the curfew stage (March 2 to June 20), and the post-curfew stage (June 21 to December 31),.6
Each prescription's status was categorized into one of four categories according to the Anat system classification. An e-prescription was considered “dispensed” if the patient obtained the prescription from the pharmacy within 3 days, “expired” if the patient did not obtain the prescription within 3 days of issuing, “updated” if the prescriber changed any of the prescription medication information before dispensing, and “voided” if the provider canceled the prescription before the medication was dispensed.
“Primary adherence” refers to a patient successfully receiving a medication within a specified number of days after the prescription is issued.21 In this study, primary medication adherence was defined as when the patient obtaining and filling their first medication prescription from the pharmacy within 3 days of the issue date, as any e-prescribed medication that is not dispensed within 3 days is considered expired by Anat system.
The 460 drugs corresponding to the 13 therapeutic areas were categorized according to the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) classification system.35
Drugs were also categorized by legal status as over-the-counter (OTC) or prescription-only medicines (PoM) following the Saudi Food and Drug Authority (SFDA) classification.36 Additionally, medications were also classified into antibiotics and non-antibiotics using the antibiotic medication ATC code (J01).
Statistical analysis
After the data were cleaned in Microsoft Excel, version 2018 for Windows, the data were analyzed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences Statistics (SPSS) for Windows, version 28 software.
A descriptive analysis was used to summarize the data. The categorical variables were presented as numbers and percentages to present the characteristics of patients, practitioners, and e-prescriptions. In addition, we used the chi-square test to determine the relationship between primary medication adherence and the antibiotics prescribing and their association with the independent variables.
The logistic regression analysis was performed with two levels: primary adherence and antibiotics prescribing rate, to test the associations between all the variables. Results are reported as adjusted odds ratio (AOR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). A p value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
Results
Patient characteristics
A stratified random sample of 25,000 e-prescriptions showed a higher percentage of e-prescribing to female patients than to their male counterparts 58.1% (n = 14,515) and 41.1% (n = 10,304), respectively. The majority (69.9%, n = 17,474) of the patients was Saudis. Only 3.5% (n = 863) e-prescriptions were issued for babies (0–2 years), with 33.5% (n = 8380) middle-aged adults receiving the most e-prescriptions.
The highest proportion of e-prescriptions (19%, n = 4759) was issued for respiratory diseases (ICD-10 code J); the fewest e-prescriptions (0.9%, n = 222) were issued for pregnancy and childbirth (ICD-10 code O). Overall, the most common reasons for e-prescriptions were related to non-chronic diseases (77.4%, n = 19,355) (Table 1).
| Remote Prescriptions | ||
|---|---|---|
| Variable | n | % |
| Gender | ||
| Male | 10,304 | 41.1 |
| Female | 14,515 | 58.1 |
| Missing | 181 | 0.7 |
| Nationality | ||
| Saudi | 17,474 | 69.9 |
| Non-Saudi | 1576 | 6.3 |
| Missing | 5950 | 23.8 |
| Age | ||
| Babies (0–2) | 863 | 3.5 |
| Children (3–16) | 3886 | 15.5 |
| Young adults (17–30) | 7539 | 30.2 |
| Middle-aged adults (31–45) | 8380 | 33.5 |
| Old adults (+45) | 4329 | 17.3 |
| Missing | 3 | 0.0 |
| Diagnosis | ||
| Respiratory system | 4759 | 19 |
| Skin and subcutaneous tissue | 3818 | 15.3 |
| Digestive system | 2612 | 10.4 |
| Genitourinary system | 2236 | 8.9 |
| Infectious and parasitic diseases | 2173 | 8.7 |
| Mental disorders | 1992 | 8.0 |
| Eye diseases | 1990 | 8.0 |
| Injury and poisoning | 932 | 3.7 |
| Ear and mastoid process | 889 | 3.6 |
| Endocrine and metabolic diseases | 726 | 2.9 |
| Musculoskeletal system | 701 | 2.8 |
| Circulatory system | 447 | 1.8 |
| Nervous system | 309 | 1.2 |
| Pregnancy and childbirth | 222 | 0.9 |
| Othera | 1194 | 4.8 |
| Chronic diseases | ||
| Chronic | 5645 | 22.6 |
| Non-chronic | 19,355 | 77.4 |
a
Other: Symptoms, signs, and abnormal clinical and laboratory findings, not elsewhere classified, neoplasms, blood and blood-forming organs, perinatal period, congenital malformations, deformations and chromosomal abnormalities, external causes of morbidity, health status and contact with health services, codes for special purposes. Any diagnosis (<100) or un-clear diagnosis was categorized in Other.
Practitioners’ characteristics
The most common prescriber specialties were associated with primary care (family medicine and general medicine). Of the 25,000 e-prescriptions, the highest proportion was prescribed by family medicine practitioners (56%, n = 14,039), followed by general medicine practitioners (19%, n = 4757); the lowest numbers were from cardiology and radiology specialists 0.4% (n = 89) and 0.1% (n = 30), respectively (Table 2).
| Remote Prescriptions | ||
|---|---|---|
| Variable | n | % |
| Specialty | ||
| Family medicine | 14,039 | 56 |
| General medicine | 4757 | 19 |
| Psychiatry | 1460 | 5.8 |
| Internal medicine | 798 | 3.2 |
| Surgery | 770 | 3.1 |
| Dermatology | 730 | 2.9 |
| Pediatrics | 491 | 1.9 |
| Ophthalmology | 257 | 1 |
| Obstetrics and gynecology | 183 | 0.7 |
| Dentistry | 182 | 0.7 |
| Neurology | 124 | 0.5 |
| Emergency | 115 | 0.5 |
| Cardiovascular medicine | 89 | 0.4 |
| Radiology | 30 | 0.1 |
| Othera | 263 | 1.1 |
| MISSING | 712 | 2.8 |
a
Other: endocrinology, gastroenterology, geriatrics, hematology, immunology, intensive care medicine, nephrology, oncology, pulmonology, rehabilitation, social service, pharmacy, preventive medicine, nuclear medicine, nursing, medical jurisprudence, medical microbiology, epidemiology, clinical pathology, anatomical pathology, anesthesiology. Any specialty (<100) was categorized in Other.
Among the 25,000 practitioners included in the study, a total of 8421 practitioners (33%) were found to have prescribed anti-infective drugs. The most prescribed anti-infective drug was amoxicillin (ATC code J01CA04), which was included in prescriptions by 4285 practitioners (50%). Notably, 86% (n = 3696) of those prescribing amoxicillin were primary care practitioners. A detailed breakdown of each practitioner’s specialty-specific prescriptions can be found in Supplementary Material 1.
Electronic prescriptions characteristics
The largest proportion of prescriptions (32.4%, n = 8106) comprised anti-infective drugs (ATC group J). The least commonly prescribed drug category (0.3%, n = 68) was antineoplastic and immunomodulating drugs (ATC group L; Table 3).
| Remote Prescriptions | ||
|---|---|---|
| Variable | n | % |
| Therapeutic area | ||
| Anti-infective | 8106 | 32.4 |
| Sensory organs | 3929 | 15.7 |
| Nervous system | 3618 | 14.5 |
| Dermatological | 3156 | 12.6 |
| Alimentary tract and metabolism | 1811 | 7.2 |
| Respiratory system | 1536 | 6.1 |
| Musculoskeletal system | 1104 | 4.4 |
| Cardiovascular system | 596 | 2.4 |
| Genitourinary system and sex hormones | 428 | 1.7 |
| Blood and blood-forming organs | 260 | 1 |
| Antiparasitic products | 196 | 0.8 |
| Systemic hormonal preparations | 192 | 0.8 |
| Antineoplastic and immunomodulating | 68 | 0.3 |
| Drug class | ||
| Antibacterial | 8034 | 32.1 |
| Ophthalmological | 3916 | 15.7 |
| Psycho-analeptics | 1524 | 6.1 |
| Analgesics | 1304 | 5.2 |
| Antifungals | 1117 | 4.5 |
| Anti-inflammatory | 1000 | 4.0 |
| Corticosteroid | 947 | 3.8 |
| Antihistamine | 851 | 3.4 |
| Anti-acne | 606 | 2.4 |
| Gastrointestinal | 460 | 1.8 |
| Acid drugs | 457 | 1.8 |
| Psycholeptic | 432 | 1.7 |
| Obstructive airway | 382 | 1.5 |
| Diabetes drugs | 327 | 1.3 |
| Vitamins | 307 | 1.2 |
| Gynecological drugs | 298 | 1.2 |
| Nasal preparation | 252 | 1.0 |
| Anti-epileptic | 244 | 1.0 |
| Antiviral | 238 | 1.0 |
| Dermatological | 209 | 0.8 |
| Antimycotics | 150 | 0.6 |
| Renin-angiotensin | 141 | 0.6 |
| Anti-anemic drugs | 136 | 0.5 |
| Beta-blockers | 136 | 0.5 |
| Lipid-modifying agents | 136 | 0.5 |
| Stomatological preparations | 102 | 0.4 |
| Other* | 1294 | 5.2 |
| Drug classification | ||
| OTC | 5300 | 21.2 |
| PoM | 19,700 | 78.8 |
| Antibiotics group | ||
| Antibiotics medication | 8034 | 32.1 |
| Non-antibiotics medications | 16,966 | 67.9 |
| Prescription status | ||
| Dispensed | 8885 | 35.5 |
| Expired | 15,547 | 62.2 |
| Voided | 353 | 1.4 |
| Updated | 215 | 0.9 |
OTC: over-the-counter; PoM: prescription-only medicines.
*Any drug class (<100 drugs) was categorized in Other.
With respect to drug classes, the most commonly prescribed class was antibacterial medications (32%, n = 8034). The least commonly prescribed class (0.408%, n = 102) was stomatological preparations (dental treatments). With respect to drug classifications, nearly 78.8% (n = 19,700) of the 25,000 prescribed medications were for PoMs, whereas 21% (n = 5300) were for OTC prescriptions. In terms of prescription status, expired e-prescriptions made up the largest proportion, at 62.2% (n = 15,547), followed by dispensed e-prescriptions (35.5%, n = 8885) (Table 3).
The monthly rate of e-prescriptions
During the pre-COVID-19 stage (from January 1 to March 1), 2.3% (n = 573/25,000) e-prescriptions were issued in 2020. With the beginning of the curfew stage, the total rate of e-prescriptions was 65.5% (n = 16,377).
Compared to the curfew stage, the rate of e-prescriptions decreased dramatically during the post-curfew stage (32.2%, n = 8050/25,000) (Figure 1).
During the curfew stage (March 2 to June 20), most of the e-prescriptions (74.3%, n = 12,166/16,377) were issued during the weekdays (Sunday to Thursday), and fewer (25.7%, n = 4211/16,377) were issued during the weekends (Friday and Saturday; Figure 2). In addition, the rate of dispensed medication was higher during the weekdays than on the weekends 59.2% (n = 5260/8886) and 21.4% (n = 1906/8886), respectively.
The association of primary adherence and antibiotics prescription with the sample characteristics
Chi-squared tests for independent variables were utilized to examine the associations with primary adherence. There were statistically significant associations between primary adherence and the following variables: age, diagnosis, drug class, and time stage (p < 0.001). There was no statistically significant association between primary adherence and gender (24,255; χ21 = 0.772; p > 0.001) (Supplementary Material 2).
Among drug classes, antibiotics were the most frequently prescribed. The prescription of antibiotics was significantly associated with patient age, diagnosis, and practitioner specialty (p < 0.001). In contrast, there was no statistically significant relationship between gender and antibiotic prescription (24,819; χ21 = 2.0; p = 0.152). In addition, time stages were not significantly associated with the prescription of antibiotics (25,000; χ21 = 3.3; p = 0.188) (Supplementary Material 3).
Bivariate analysis
The logistic regression analysis was performed in two stages. First, in the bivariate analysis of primary adherence, all independent variables were significantly associated with primary adherence, with the exception of gender (odds ratio (OR) 1.024; 95% CI 0.971–1.080; p = 0.379; Table 4).
| Primary adherence | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bivariate | Multivariate | |||||
| Variable | OR | 95% CI | p value | AOR | 95% CI | p value |
| Gender | ||||||
| Male | Ref | Ref | ||||
| Female | 0.977 | (0.926–1.030) | 0.379 | 0.896 | (0.941–1.054) | 0.896 |
| Age | ||||||
| Babies (0–2) | 1.082 | (0.936–1.251) | 0.287 | 1.043 | (0.896–1.215) | 0.585 |
| Children (3–16) | 1.377 | (1.274–1.489) | <0.001 | 1.150 | (1.058–1.215) | 0.001 |
| Young adults (17–30) | 0.857 | (0.802–0.916) | <0.001 | 0.901 | (0.840–0.965) | 0.003 |
| Middle-aged adults (31–45) | Ref | Ref | ||||
| Old adults (+45) | 0.882 | (0.815–0.954) | 0.002 | 1.064 | (0.978–1.158) | 0.148 |
| Diagnosis | ||||||
| Respiratory system | Ref | Ref | ||||
| Skin and subcutaneous tissue | 0.594 | (0.544–0.650) | <0.001 | 0.754 | (0.676–0.841) | <0.001 |
| Digestive system | 1.005 | (0.912–1.107) | 0.926 | 0.994 | (0.893–1.107) | 0.914 |
| Genitourinary system | 0.753 | (0.679–0.835) | <0.001 | 0.803 | (0.715–0.902) | <0.001 |
| Infectious and parasitic diseases | 0.685 | (0.616–0.761) | <0.001 | 0.858 | (0.759–0.971) | 0.015 |
| Mental disorders | 0.353 | (0.312–0.399) | <0.001 | 0.713 | (0.515–0.986) | 0.041 |
| Eye diseases | 0.798 | (0.717–0.888) | <0.001 | 0.889 | (0.770–1.028) | 0.112 |
| Injury and poisoning | 0.710 | (0.613–0.822) | <0.001 | 0.759 | (0.649–0.887) | <0.001 |
| Ear and mastoid process | 1.006 | (0.870–1.163) | 0.936 | 0.951 | (0.817–1.106) | 0.513 |
| Endocrine and metabolic diseases | 0.294 | (0.241–0.359) | <0.001 | 0.479 | (0.377–0.607) | <0.001 |
| Musculoskeletal system | 0.629 | (0.532–0.745) | <0.001 | 0.690 | (0.574–0.829) | <0.001 |
| Circulatory system | 0.321 | (0.251–0.410) | <0.001 | 0.494 | (0.373–0.654) | <0.001 |
| Nervous system | 0.293 | (0.218–0.394) | <0.001 | 0.432 | (0.307–0.607) | <0.001 |
| Pregnancy and childbirth | 0.576 | (0.430–0.772) | <0.001 | 0.727 | (0.535–0.988) | 0.042 |
| Other | 0.614 | (0.535–0.704) | <0.001 | 0.695 | (0.601–0.805) | <0.001 |
| Drug class | ||||||
| Antibacterial | Ref | Ref | ||||
| Ophthalmological | 0.783 | (0.724–0.848) | <0.001 | 0.838 | (0.752–9.33) | 0.001 |
| Psycho-analeptics | 0.361 | (0.317–0.412) | <0.001 | 0.566 | (0.408–0.786) | <0.001 |
| Analgesics | 1.037 | (0.920–1.169) | 0.551 | 0.951 | (0.839–1.077) | 0.427 |
| Antifungals | 0.524 | (0.456–0.602) | <0.001 | 0.577 | (0.496–0.670) | <0.001 |
| Anti-inflammatory | 1.113 | (0.975–1.272) | 0.114 | 1.063 | (0.923–1.225) | 0.396 |
| Corticosteroid | 0.621 | (0.537–0.718) | <0.001 | 0.701 | (0.599–819) | <0.001 |
| Antihistamine | 1.007 | (0.872–1.163) | 0.922 | 0.965 | (0.831–1.121) | 0.639 |
| Anti-acne | 0.312 | (0.253–0.384) | <0.001 | 0.387 | (0.308–0.485) | <0.001 |
| Gastrointestinal | 0.799 | (0.658–0.971) | 0.024 | 0.770 | (0.629–0.944) | 0.012 |
| Acid drugs | 0.686 | (0.562–0.839) | <0.001 | 0.639 | (0.518–0.788) | <0.001 |
| Psycholeptic | 0.395 | (0.313–0.499) | <0.001 | 0.570 | (0.389–0.835) | 0.004 |
| Obstructive airway | 0.575 | (0.460–0.720) | <0.001 | 0.515 | (0.408–0.651) | <0.001 |
| Diabetes drugs | 0.258 | (0.191–0.350) | <0.001 | 0.390 | (0.277–0.550) | <0.001 |
| Vitamins | 0.619 | (0.480–0.798) | <0.001 | 0.862 | (0.656–1.132) | 0.286 |
| Gynecological drugs | 0.868 | (0.686–1.099) | 0.241 | 0.983 | (0.766–1.260) | 0.890 |
| Nasal preparation | 0.955 | (0.740–1.231) | 0.721 | 0.834 | (0.641–1.086) | 0.177 |
| Anti-epileptic | 0.321 | (0.232–0.445) | <0.001 | 0.541 | (0.371–0.790) | 0.001 |
| Antiviral | 0.574 | (0.431–0.764) | <0.001 | 0.662 | (0.488–0.898) | 0.008 |
| Dermatological | 0.594 | (0.441–0.799) | <0.001 | 0.719 | (0.527–0.982) | 0.038 |
| Antimycotics | 0.602 | (0.425–0.853) | 0.004 | 0.698 | (0.487–0.999) | 0.050 |
| Renin-angiotensin | 0.339 | (0.222–0.519) | <0.001 | 0.486 | (0.306–0.773) | 0.002 |
| Anti-anemic drugs | 0.453 | (0.306–0.671) | <0.001 | 0.566 | (0.377–0.850) | 0.006 |
| Beta-blockers | 0.307 | (0.197–0.480) | <0.001 | 0.493 | (0.304–0.800) | 0.004 |
| Lipid-modifying agents | 0.173 | (0.101–0.298) | <0.001 | 0.236 | (0.134–0.415) | <0.001 |
| Stomatological preparations | 1.256 | (0.850–1.856) | 0.253 | 1.043 | (0.700–1.553) | 0.836 |
| Other | 0.441 | (0.385–0.504) | <0.001 | 0.500 | (0.432–0.579) | <0.001 |
| Time stages | ||||||
| Pre-COVID-19 (Jan 1–Mar 1) | 0.275 | (0.219–0.344) | <0.001 | 0.257 | (0.205–0.323) | <0.001 |
| Curfew (Mar 2–Jun 20) | Ref | Ref | ||||
| Post-curfew (Jun 21–Dec 31) | 0.439 | (0.413–0.466) | <0.001 | 0.451 | (0.424–0.480) | <0.001 |
OR: odds ratio; CI: confidence interval; AOR: adjusted odds ratio.
In the bivariate analysis of antibiotic prescriptions, all independent variables were found to have statistically significant relationship, with the exceptions of gender (OR 1.040; 95% CI 0.787–1.128; p = 152) and time stages (curfew stage: OR 0.942; 95% CI 0.986–1.098; p = 0.518; and post-curfew stage: OR 0.992; 95% CI 0.827–1.191; p = 0.935; Table 5).
| Antibiotic Prescribing | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bivariate | Multivariate | |||||
| Variable | OR | 95% CI | p value | AOR | 95% CI | p value |
| Gender | ||||||
| Male | Ref | Ref | ||||
| Female | 0.961 | (0.911–1.015) | 0.152 | 0.877 | (0.823–0.935) | <0.001 |
| Age | ||||||
| Babies (0–2) | 0.708 | (0.604–0.829) | <0.001 | 0.940 | (0.787–1.123) | 0.494 |
| Children (3–16) | 1.533 | (1.418–1.657) | 1.465 | (1.338–1.603) | <0.001 | |
| Young adults (17–30) | 0.859 | (0.803–0.918) | 0.934 | (0.865–1.008) | 0.079 | |
| Middle-aged adults (31–45) | Ref | Ref | ||||
| Old adults (+45) | 0.614 | (0.565–0.668) | 0.876 | (0.794–0.966) | 0.008 | |
| Diagnosis | ||||||
| Respiratory system | Ref | Ref | ||||
| Skin and subcutaneous tissue | 0.269 | (0.245–0.295) | <0.001 | 1.070 | (0.868–1.319) | 0.526 |
| Digestive system | 0.931 | (0.846–1.024) | 0.141 | 0.831 | (0.521–1.326) | 0.437 |
| Genitourinary system | 1.258 | (1.136–1.392) | <0.001 | 2.731 | (1.173–6.361) | 0.020 |
| Infectious and parasitic diseases | 0.263 | (0.234–0.295) | <0.001 | 0.155 | (0.046–0.520) | 0.003 |
| Mental disorders | 0.003 | (0.001–0.006) | <0.001 | 0.756 | (0.620–0.920) | 0.005 |
| Eye diseases | 0.024 | (0.018–0.031) | <0.001 | 1.025 | (0.949–1.106) | 0.531 |
| Injury and poisoning | 0.416 | (0.358–0.482) | <0.001 | 0.798 | (0.664–0.960) | 0.017 |
| Ear and mastoid process | 0.751 | (0.651–0.867) | <0.001 | 0.704 | (0.330–1.502) | 0.364 |
| Endocrine and metabolic | 0.037 | (0.025–0.053) | <0.001 | 1.651 | (1.205–2.263) | 0.002 |
| Musculoskeletal system | 0.160 | (0.130–0.197) | <0.001 | 0.280 | (0.121–0.647) | 0.003 |
| Circulatory system | 0.034 | (0.021–0.055) | <0.001 | 0.647 | (0.455–0.920) | 0.015 |
| Nervous system | 0.023 | (0.011–0.046) | <0.001 | 1.258 | (0.813–1.947) | 0.303 |
| Pregnancy and childbirth | 0.636 | (0.485–0.835) | 0.001 | 0.839 | (0.710–0.991) | 0.039 |
| Other | 0.270 | (0.234–0.312) | <0.001 | 0.961 | (0.706–1.308) | 0.802 |
| Specialty | ||||||
| Family medicine | Ref | Ref | ||||
| General medicine | 1.015 | (0.947–1.087) | 0.677 | 1.025 | (0.949–1.106) | 0.531 |
| Psychiatry | 0.010 | (0.005–0.020) | <0.001 | 0.280 | (0.121–0.467) | 0.003 |
| Internal medicine | 0.625 | (0.531–0.735) | <0.001 | 0.798 | (0.664–0.960) | 0.017 |
| Surgery | 1.011 | (0.869–1.176) | 0.888 | 0.839 | (0.710–0.991) | 0.039 |
| Dermatology | 0.451 | (0.375–0.543) | <0.001 | 0.756 | (0.620–0.920) | 0.005 |
| Pediatrics | 1.091 | (0.906–1.314) | 0.361 | 1.070 | (0.868–1.319) | 0.526 |
| Ophthalmology | 0.205 | (0.136–0.308) | <0.001 | 0.831 | (0.521–1.326) | 0.437 |
| Obstetrics and gynecology | 0.762 | (0.553–1.049) | 0.095 | 0.647 | (0.455–0.920) | 0.015 |
| Dentistry | 2.320 | (1.728–3.115) | <0.001 | 1.651 | (1.205–2.263) | 0.002 |
| Neurology | 0.142 | (0.072–0.281) | <0.001 | 0.704 | (0.330–1.502) | 0.364 |
| Emergency | 1.008 | (0.687–1.479) | 0.967 | 1.258 | (0.813–1.947) | 0.303 |
| Cardiovascular | 0.063 | (0.020–0.201) | <0.001 | 0.155 | (0.046–0.520) | 0.003 |
| Radiology | 1.592 | (0.776–3.265) | <0.204 | 2.731 | (1.173–6.361) | 0.020 |
| Other | 0.686 | (0.522–0.901) | 0.007 | 0.961 | (0.706–1.308) | 0.802 |
| Time stages | ||||||
| Pre-COVID-19 (Jan 1–Mar 1) | 0.942 | (0.787–1.128) | 0.518 | 0.967 | (0.791–1.182) | 0.741 |
| Curfew (Mar 2–Jun 20) | Ref | Ref | ||||
| Post-curfew (Jun 21–Dec 31) | 0.950 | (0.897–1.006) | 0.077 | 1.280 | (1.196–1.369) | <0.001 |
Multivariate analysis
In the second stage of the logistic regression analysis, we further analyzed the associations of all the variables using multivariate logistic regression. Variability in primary adherence was found across ages, diagnoses, drug classes, and time stages. Gender was found to have no effect on primary adherence (AOR 0.896; 95% CI 0.941–1.054; p = 0.896).
Overall, the multivariate logistic regression model was statistically significant (χ2 (47) = 1766.618, p < 0.05); the model explained 9.6% (Nagelkerke R2) of the variance in the adherence rate and correctly classified 64.8% of cases.
Primary adherence
Primary adherence was found to be correlated with age, with the highest rate of adherence observed in children between 3 and 16 years (AOR 1.150; 95% CI 1.058–1.215) and the lowest rate observed in young adults (17–30 years; AOR 0.901; 95% CI 0.840–0.965; Table 4).
Among the diagnosed diseases, patients diagnosed with respiratory system diseases showed a significantly higher rate of adherence than those diagnosed with other diseases. The lowest rate of adherence was observed in patients with nervous system diseases (ICD-10 code N; AOR 0.432; 95% CI 0.307–0.607; Table 4).
With respect to drug classes, the highest rate of primary adherence was observed for antibacterial drugs as compared with other variables, followed by ophthalmological medications (AOR 0.838; 95% CI 0.752–09.33) The lowest rates of adherence were observed for lipid-modifying agents (AOR 0.236; 95% CI 0.134–0.415; Table 4).
Finally, when primary adherence was assessed by time stage, e-prescriptions that were issued during the curfew stage were associated with a significantly higher rate of adherence than those issued during the other stages (Table 4).
Antibiotic prescribing
A multivariate logistic regression was also performed with only antibiotic prescriptions to ascertain the effects of gender, age, diagnosis, specialty, and time stage.
The multivariate logistic regression model was statistically significant (χ2(45) = 5942.890; p < 0.05). The model explained 30.5% (Nagelkerke R2) of the variance in the rate of antibiotics and correctly classified 73% of cases.
In the multivariate analysis, gender was found to have a significant effect on the prescription of antibiotics; female patients showed lower odds than male patients of being prescribed antibiotics (AOR 0.877; 95% CI 0.823–0.935).
The prescription of antibiotics was found to be associated with age, with the highest rate of antibiotics prescribed for children between the ages of 3 and 16 years (AOR 1.465; 95% CI 1.338–1.603) and the lowest rate prescribed for older adults (+45 years) (AOR 0.876; 95% CI 0.794–0.966).
With respect to the diagnosed diseases, antibiotics were prescribed at the highest rate for patients diagnosed with genitourinary system diseases (AOR 2.731; 95% CI 1.173–6.361). The lowest rates of antibiotic prescriptions were observed in patients diagnosed with infectious diseases (a disease caused by a pathogenic organism, such as bacteria, viruses, or fungi37) (AOR 0.155; 95% CI 0.046–0.520).
With respect to prescriber specialties, radiologists (AOR 2.731; 95% CI 1.173–6.361) and dentists (AOR 1.651; 95% CI 1.205–2.263) prescribed antibiotics at significantly higher rates than prescribers of other specialties.
Finally, when antibiotic prescriptions were assessed by time stage, prescriptions that were issued during the curfew stage showed higher odds of being for antibiotics than those issued during other stages (Table 5).
Discussion
This research explored the utilization of the remote prescription system in Saudi Arabia during the COVID-19 pandemic and the factors associated with primary medication adherence and antibiotic prescribing rates.
This study resulted in three key findings. First, most of the remote e-prescriptions (58%, n = 14,515) were issued for female patients; 33.5% (n = 8380) were for middle-aged adults; 70% (n = 17,474) were for Saudi citizens. The most commonly diagnosed diseases were respiratory diseases (19%, n = 4759). Most of the prescribed drugs were by primary care specialists (75%, n = 18,796), and 74% (n = 18,484) of the prescriptions were issued on weekdays.
Second, the total primary adherence rate was 35.5% (n = 8885); i.e. nearly two out of five e-prescriptions were actually dispensed. The predictors of primary adherence were as follows: children, patients with respiratory diseases, and antibiotic medications.
Third, antibiotics were the most commonly prescribed type of drug, accounting for 32% of all prescriptions (n = 8034). Antibiotic use was significantly associated with male gender, children, genitourinary system diseases, and being treated by radiologists.
Comparison with other studies and explanation
Primary adherence
This study showed that the rate of primary adherence to remote e-prescriptions was suboptimal, as only (35.5%) of the prescriptions were ultimately dispensed. This figure is somewhat lower than those reported in other studies. A previous study from Poland on 119,880 e-prescriptions found the rate of medication adherence to be nearly (79%).38 Another study from Spain on 2.9 million prescriptions reported that the adherence rate for all prescriptions was (53.6%).39 The discrepancy between the results of the present study and those of prior studies indicates that primary adherence is a significant issue. One possible explanation is that primary adherence is a multifaceted challenge; it is patient- and medication-dependent throughout the process, from consultation to dispensation.40
Primary adherence in both remote e-prescriptions and on-site prescriptions refers to the concept of patients filling their prescriptions after receiving them from their healthcare provider.41,42 Previous studies that have compared primary adherence between e-prescriptions and on-site prescriptions showed that remote e-prescriptions have the potential to improve primary adherence.43,44 A study conducted in the United State analyzed 423,616 prescriptions and found that e-prescriptions were associated with a higher likelihood of primary medication adherence (53%) compared to paper prescriptions (43%).45 Similarly, another study conducted in the United States which analyzed 4318 prescriptions found that e-prescriptions had higher rates of medication adherence (80.2%) compared to paper prescriptions (62.8%).46 These findings support the notion that remote e-prescriptions can be effectively enhance primary adherence, likely due to the convenience and automation they offer.44,47,48 However, it is important to note that the rate of primary medication adherence observed in our study (35.5%) was still suboptimal compared to previous research findings.
In this study, patient age was significantly associated with primary adherence. The highest level of adherence was associated with patients between 3 and 16 years of age. Similarly, in a Massachusetts study, the highest adherence rate of all prescribed drugs (87%) was observed in children under the age of 18 years.22 Additionally, a study from Sweden found an (82%) adherence rate for antidepressant prescriptions in individuals under 19 years of age.49 A possible explanation for the higher adherence rate in children could be attributed to the parents’ eagerness to receive the medications and follow up on their children's medical conditions.50
In this study, certain types of diseases and drugs were also associated with primary adherence. With respect to these factors, the highest adherence rates were observed in patients with respiratory diseases (45%) and those taking antibacterial drugs (43%). Potential explanations for the higher rate of adherence in patients with respiratory diseases include that these types of conditions, especially asthma, require the continued use of medications to achieve successful disease control and better therapeutic outcomes.51,52 The antibiotic medication adherence finding aligns with results from other studies. In a prior study in Poland, the lowest non-adherence rate (14.3%) was observed in patients who were prescribed antibiotics.38 Additionally, a previous study in Spain found that 76.88% of filled prescriptions were for penicillin.39
In terms of time stages, the adherence rate was significantly higher during the curfew stage, from March 2 to June 20. A previous study from Germany showed that primary adherence during the pandemic (March 2020) was significantly higher than that prior to the pandemic (March 2019).53 In the United States, during the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic (from January to March 2020), it was found that patients with respiratory illnesses showed increased medication adherence during the last week of March 2020 compared to the first 7 days of January 2020.54 The comparison of studies regarding primary adherence is summarized in Supplementary material 4.
Improving primary medication adherence is a multifaceted issue that required system improvements as well as the establishment of strong patient–provider relationships.40 It is important to address the root causes of primary non-adherence and develop tailored solutions that address individual patient needs. In Saudi Arabia, the Anat system specifies that remote e-prescriptions can be dispensed up to 3 days after the date of prescribing.30 This short period may limit patients’ access to their medications, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic, when it can be difficult to fill prescriptions in a timely manner. This may contribute to the low adherence rate found in the present study. Therefore, efforts should be made to revise the current policy and increase the prescription timeframe to improve access to medication and decrease non-adherence rates. This revision would align with approaches used in other countries such as the United States, United Kingdom, and Australia, where prescriptions are valid for 6 to 12 months, depending on the medication type (controlled or non-controlled) and pharmacist's clinical judgment.55–57 Implementing other strategies such as offering medication home delivery service and prescription pick-up reminders could also be effective in facilitating medication access and improving adherence rates and ultimately lead to better health outcomes for patients.58–60 Furthermore, affordability and out-of-pocket medication costs may have played a role in the present study's low medication adherence rate, as insurance companies do not cover expenses for medications that are prescribed through the Anat platform.30 Exploring options for reducing the cost of medications such as working with insurance companies to cover prescriptions issued from Anat system and utilizing generic medication name when possible can help address financial barriers that may contribute to primary non-adherence.61 Additionally, healthcare providers can also play a crucial role in addressing medication adherence issues.41,62 They should prioritize open discussions with patients regarding medication adherence, provide education on how to obtain medications, and implement effective follow-up measures. By establishing a strong patient–provider relationship and actively involving patients in their treatment plans, healthcare providers can improve patient outcomes and reduce the burden of medication non-adherence on the healthcare system.41,60,62,63
Antibiotic prescribing
The present study showed that male gender was associated with higher antibiotic e-prescription rates. A study from Eritrea found that the largest proportion of prescriptions (53%) comprised antibiotic prescriptions. The study also reported that males were more likely to receive antibiotic prescriptions than females.64 This finding may reflect differences in the types of consultations and the infectious diseases between genders. Some infectious diseases affect males and females differently; in particular, urinary tract infections are more common in female patients, while respiratory diseases are more common in male patients.65 These studies provide evidence that there may be gender disparities in antibiotic prescribing, with males being more likely to receive prescriptions than females. However, it's important to note that prescribing practices can vary depending on a variety of factors and more research is needed to fully understand the reasons behind these disparities in antibiotic e-prescriptions in Saudi Arabia.
Additional findings include children and genitourinary system diseases. Children from 3 to 16 years of age were more likely to receive antibiotics than any other age group. One possible explanation involves the roles of parents, as increased parental demand for antibiotics may lead to overprescribing.66,67 Furthermore, genitourinary system diseases have been linked to antibiotic use in children. A previous study from Saudi Arabia reported that urinary tract infections were the most common type of infection in children <5 years old.68 The prevalence rates of urinary tract infections in Saudi Arabia were 25% among all age groups and 26% among children between 4.5 and 5 years of age.69,70
The present study also found that certain specialties were associated with the prescribing of antibiotics. Interestingly, radiologists were more likely to prescribe antibiotics than other specialties. Several studies have reported the roles of radiologists in prescribing antibiotics; most interventional radiologists prescribe antibiotics as preventive treatments (prophylaxes) in procedures.71–73 However, their role in prescribing medication in outpatient's clinic setting is not very clear. More research is required to elucidate the reasons for this increase, and further training on remote e-prescribing and reviewing the prescribing privileges for controlled medications is recommended. The comparison of studies regarding antibiotic prescribing is summarized in Supplementary material 5.
In the study, Antibiotics were the most frequently prescribed type of drug. Antibiotic overuse and misuse are major contributors to antibiotic resistance, which is a growing global health threat.19,24,74The Saudi MOH has developed guidelines for the appropriate use of antibiotics in healthcare facilities to combat antibiotic resistance and promote the rational use of antibiotics.75–77 Additionally, the SFDA regulates the import and sale of antibiotics in the country to ensure their safety and efficacy.78–80 Unfortunately, there is no specific information available regarding Saudi Arabia's antibiotics guideline for remote e-prescriptions. However, it is reasonable to assume that the guidelines for appropriate antibiotic use in healthcare facilities would also be applicable to remote e-prescriptions.77 It is essential to recognize that remote e-prescriptions have the potential to improve the accuracy and efficiency of prescribing antibiotics. Nevertheless, it is crucial to consider that the process in which remote e-prescriptions are utilized, such as prescribing over the phone or through videoconferencing without direct patient assessment, may require tailored guidelines. While remote e-prescriptions offer many benefits, the appropriate use and monitoring of antibiotics remain vital in preventing antibiotic resistance. It is important for healthcare providers to exercise caution and adhere to best practices when prescribing antibiotics via remote e-prescriptions, ensuring that patient assessments and clinical considerations are appropriately addressed, striking a balance between the benefits and potential limitations associated with the remote e-prescribing process.
Limitations and strengths of the study
The present study employed a relatively large, real-world population and analyzed both prescription and dispensing data. The interpretation of the findings may contribute to a greater understanding of primary adherence and antibiotic e-prescribing issues in the Saudi population.
While the study used an electronic prescription database to determine antibiotic prescribing rates, no information about the practitioners’ gender or experience was provided. Further, it was not possible to compare primary adherence between 2019 and 2020 due to the lack of data.
Future research should prioritize investigating practitioner medical specialties in relation to remote e-prescriptions and on-site prescriptions in Saudi Arabia. This research is crucial to understand the unique challenges and advantages that different therapeutic areas present in remote e-prescribing. Identifying medical specialties that predominantly utilize remote e-prescriptions will provide valuable insights into prescribing practices across healthcare specialties. Studying the impact of remote e-prescriptions and on-site prescriptions in different therapeutic areas can pinpoint domains where remote e-prescriptions offer significant benefits and cost-effectiveness. This comprehensive understanding will inform the implementation and adoption of remote e-prescribing practices, assisting healthcare providers, policymakers, and stakeholders in making informed decisions and developing tailored strategies to optimize remote e-prescription use in Saudi Arabia. Furthermore, exploring the impact of antibiotic remote e-prescriptions on patient outcomes and revising the current antibiotic guidelines to effectively accommodate the unique aspects of remote e-prescriptions is essential. By comprehensively understanding the potential benefits and challenges associated with remote e-prescriptions in different contexts, healthcare providers and policymakers can make well-informed decisions, leading to improved patient care and reduced healthcare costs.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the rate of primary adherence in Saudi Arabia was 35% when all medications were considered. The adherence rate varied according to patient age, disease, medication, and time stage. The overall prevalence of antibiotic prescriptions in the study was 32%. Patient gender, age, medical disease, and provider specialty were significant predictors for the prescribing of antibiotics. The findings of this study highlight the need for interventions directed toward improving primary medication adherence and antibiotics prescription. Furthermore, this study's findings may help decision-makers in improving e-prescribing practices to ensure more patient-centered care.
Acknowledgements
The authors gratefully acknowledge the support provided by the Research Office at King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences (KSAU-HS). We would also like to acknowledge the cooperation of the Saudi Ministry of Health and Lean Business Services company in providing us with the data.
Ethical approval
The ethical clearance was obtained from the institutional review board of King Abdullah International Medical Research Center (SP21R/342/06–11 July 2021).
Informed Consent
No informed consent was required for this study. All data used in this study were obtained from a database and data were deidentified prior to analysis.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: The authors gratefully acknowledge the funding for the publication of this paper by King Abdullah International Medical Research Center.
ORCID iDs
Roaa Khaled Alhassoun https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2134-6671
Sharifah Abdullah AlDossary https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1737-301X
Footnote
Guarantor RKA.
References
1. Smith AC, Thomas E, Snoswell CL, et al. Telehealth for global emergencies: implications for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). J Telemed Telecare 2020; 26: 309–313.
2. Bidwal M, Lor K, Yu J, et al. Evaluation of asthma medication adherence rates and strategies to improve adherence in the underserved population at a Federally Qualified Health Center. Res Social Adm Pharm 2017; 13: 759–766.
3. World Health Organization. WHO Director-General’s opening remarks at the media briefing on COVID-19, https://www.who.int/director-general/speeches/detail/who-director-general-s-opening-remarks-at-the-media-briefing-on-covid-19—12-november-2021 (2021, accessed 18 December 2021).
4. Algaissi AA, Alharbi NK, Hassanain M, et al. Preparedness and response to COVID-19 in Saudi Arabia: building on MERS experience. J Infect Public Health 2020; 13: 834–838.
5. World Health Organization. WHO Coronavirus (COVID-19) dashboard, https://covid19.who.int/info/ (2020, accessed 18 December 2021).
6. The Saudi Ministry of Health. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia’s experience in health preparedness and response to COVID-19 pandemic, https://www.moh.gov.sa/en/Ministry/MediaCenter/Publications/Documents/COVID-19-NATIONAL.pdf (2020, accessed 23 March 2022).
7. Khan A, Alsofayan Y, Alahmari A, et al. COVID-19 in Saudi Arabia: the national health response. East Mediterr Heal J 2021; 27: 1114–1124.
8. Sayed AA. The progressive public measures of Saudi Arabia to tackle COVID-19 and limit its spread. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2021; 18: –9.
9. Wittenberg E, Goldsmith JV, Chen C, et al. Opportunities to improve COVID-19 provider communication resources: a systematic review. Patient Educ Couns 2021; 104: 438–451.
10. French J, Kroll M, Sharp J. Maintaining healthcare quality during COVID-19 and the future of care. HIMSS, https://www.himss.org/resources/maintaining-healthcare-quality-during-covid-19-and-future-care (2020, accessed 18 December 2021).
11. Leite H, Hodgkinson IR, Gruber T. New development: ‘healing at a distance’—telemedicine and COVID-19. Public Money Manag 2020; 40: 483–485.
12. Bahl S, Singh RP, Javaid M, et al. Telemedicine technologies for confronting COVID-19 pandemic: a review. J Ind Integr Manag 2020; 5: 547–561.
13. Roine R, Ohinmaa A, Hailey D. Assessing telemedicine: a systematic review of the literature. CMAJ 2001; 165: 765–771.
14. Voran D. Telemedicine and beyond. Mo Med 2015; 112: 129–135.
15. Lim EC, Chen CYT, Tan EK. Remote prescription during pandemic: challenges and solutions. Arch Med Res 2021; 52: 450–452.
16. Royal College of Nursing. COVID-19 remote prescribing, https://www.rcn.org.uk/clinical-topics/medicines-management/covid-19-remote-prescribing (2022, accessed 18 December 2021).
17. Coombes C, Gregory ME. The current and future use of telemedicine in infectious diseases practice. Curr Infect Dis Rep 2019; 21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11908-019-0697-2
18. Mold F, Hendy J, Lai Y-L, et al. Electronic consultation in primary care between providers and patients: systematic review. J Med Internet Res 2019; 7: e13042.
19. Han S, Greenfield G, Majeed A, et al. Impact of remote consultations on antibiotic prescribing in primary health care: systematic review. J Med Internet Res 2020; 22: e23482.
20. Pottegård A, Christensen RD, Houji A, et al. Primary non-adherence in general practice: a Danish register study. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 2014; 70: 757–763.
21. Raebel MA, Schmittdiel J, Karter AJ, et al. Standardizing terminology and definitions of medication adherence and persistence in research employing electronic databases. Med Care 2013; 51: S11–S21.
22. Fischer MA, Stedman MR, Lii J, et al. Primary medication non-adherence: analysis of 195,930 electronic prescriptions. J Gen Intern Med 2010; 25: 284–290.
23. Haaijer-Ruskamp F, Stewart R, Wesseling H. Does indirect consultation lead to overprescribing in general practice?. Soc Sci Med 1987; 25: 43–46.
24. Ewen E, Willey VJ, Kolm P, et al. Antibiotic prescribing by telephone in primary care. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2015; 24: 113–120.
25. Alkhashan HI, Al-Khaldi YM, Hassanein MS, et al. Telephone consultation services in Saudi Arabia: utilization pattern and satisfaction among health care providers and consumers. J Health Inform Dev Ctries 2020; 14.
26. The Saudi Ministry of Health. About Seha applications, https://www.moh.gov.sa/en/Support/Pages/MobileApp.aspx# (2022, accessed 18 December 2021).
27. Alharbi A, Alzuwaed J, Qasem H. Evaluation of e-health (Seha) application: a cross-sectional study in Saudi Arabia. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak; 21. Epub ahead of print 1 December 2021. https://doi.org/10.1186/S12911-021-01437-6.
28. Lean Business Services. About SEHHATY platform, https://lean.sa/ (2022, accessed 18 December 2021).
29. Al Aloola N, Aljudaib S, Behery F, et al. Perception of the community toward transition of pharmaceutical care services from Ministry of Health primary healthcare centers to community pharmacies. Int J Healthc 2023; 9: 21.
30. ANAT. About ANAT platform, https://anat.sa/ (accessed 18 December 2021).
31. Unified National Platform (GOV.SA). E-prescription, https://www.my.gov.sa/wps/portal/snp/servicesDirectory/servicedetails/12410 (2023, accessed 3 June 2023).
32. Forthofer RN, Lee ES, Hernandez M. Biostatistics: a guide to design, analysis and discovery. Biostat A Guid to Des Anal Discov 2006; 6: 135–166.
33. Alteryx. Data science and analytics automation platform, https://www.alteryx.com/ (accessed 7 January 2023).
34. Al-Onazi M, Fahad Almahfouz N, Saud A, et al. Medical specialty selection guide. J Heal Spec Saudi Comm Heal Spec 2015; 1: 1–115.
35. World Health Organization. Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) classification, https://www.who.int/tools/atc-ddd-toolkit/atc-classification (accessed 23 March 2022).
36. Saudi Food and Drug Authority. Drugs list, https://www.sfda.gov.sa/en/drugs-list (accessed 23 March 2022).
37. Kotra LP. Infectious diseases. xPharm Compr Pharmacol Ref 2007; 1–2.
38. Kardas P, Cieszyński J, Czech M, et al. Primary nonadherence to medication and its drivers in Poland: findings from the electronic prescription pilot analysis. Polish Arch Intern Med 2020; 130: 8–16.
39. Aznar-Lou I, Fernández A, Gil-Girbau M, et al. Initial medication non-adherence: prevalence and predictive factors in a cohort of 1.6 million primary care patients. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2017; 83: 1328–1340.
40. Imlach F, McKinlay E, Kennedy J, et al. E-prescribing and access to prescription medicines during lockdown: experience of patients in Aotearoa/New Zealand. BMC Fam Pract; 22. Epub ahead of print 1 December 2021. https://doi.org/10.1186/S12875-021-01490-0.
41. Bauer AM, Parker MM, Schillinger D, et al. Associations between antidepressant adherence and shared decision-making, patient–provider trust, and communication among adults with diabetes: Diabetes Study of Northern California (DISTANCE). J Gen Intern Med 2014; 29: 1139–1147.
42. Scott AB, McClure JE. Engaging providers in medication adherence: a health plan case study. Am Heal Drug Benefits 2010; 3: 372.
43. Aluga D, Nnyanzi LA, King N, et al. Effect of electronic prescribing compared to paper-based (handwritten) prescribing on primary medication adherence in an outpatient setting: a systematic review. Appl Clin Inform 2021; 12: 845–882.
44. Osterberg L, Blaschke T. Adherence to medication. New Engl J Med 2005; 55: 68–69.
45. Fischer MA, Choudhry NK, Brill G, et al. Trouble getting started: predictors of primary medication nonadherence. Am J Med 2011; 124: 1081.e9–1081.e22.
46. Adamson AS, Suarez EA, Gorman AR. Association between method of prescribing and primary nonadherence to dermatologic medication in an urban hospital population. JAMA Dermatol 2017; 153: 49–54.
47. Toohey SL, Andrusaitis J, Boysen-Osborn M, et al. Comparison of primary compliance in electronic versus paper prescriptions prescribed from the emergency department. Am J Emerg Med 2018; 36: 1902–1904.
48. Lam WY, Fresco P. Medication adherence measures: an overview. Biomed Res Int 2015. Epub ahead of print 2015. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/217047.
49. Freccero C, Sundquist K, Sundquist J, et al. Primary adherence to antidepressant prescriptions in primary health care: a population-based study in Sweden. Scand J Prim Health Care 2016; 34: 83–88.
50. van Dellen QM, Stronks K, Bindels PJE, et al. Adherence to inhaled corticosteroids in children with asthma and their parents. Respir Med 2008; 102: 755–763.
51. George M, Bender B. New insights to improve treatment adherence in asthma and COPD. Patient Prefer Adherence 2019; 13: 1325–1334.
52. Jabeen U, Zeeshan F, Bano I, et al. Adherence to asthma treatment and their association with asthma control in children. J Pak Med Assoc 2018; 68: 725–728.
53. Kostev K, Kumar S, Konrad M, et al. Prescription rates of cardiovascular and diabetes therapies prior to and during the COVID-19 lockdown in Germany. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther 2020; 58: 475–481.
54. Kaye L, Theye B, Smeenk I, et al. Changes in medication adherence among patients with asthma and COPD during the COVID-19 pandemic. J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract 2020; 8: 2384–2385.
55. Streelman A. How long is a prescription good for? NowRx, https://nowrx.com/how-long-is-a-prescription-good-for/ (2022, accessed 12 July 2022).
56. National Health Service (NHS). How long is a prescription valid for?, https://www.nhs.uk/common-health-questions/medicines/how-long-is-a-prescription-valid-for/ (2020, accessed 12 July 2022).
57. Australian Government. Dispensing checklist for community pharmacies, https://www.servicesaustralia.gov.au/education-guide-dispensing-checklist-for-community-pharmacies (2022, accessed 12 July 2022).
58. Abu-Farha R, Alzoubi KH, Rizik M, et al. Public perceptions about home delivery of medication service and factors associated with the utilization of this service. Patient Prefer Adherence 2022; 16: 2259.
59. Luong P, Glorioso TJ, Grunwald GK, et al. Text message medication adherence reminders automated and delivered at scale across two institutions: testing the “nudge” system: pilot study. Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes; 14. Epub ahead of print 1 May 2021. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.120.007015.
60. Omotosho A, Omotosho A, Ayegba P. Medication adherence: a review and lessons for developing countries. Int Assoc Online Eng 2019; 15: 04.
61. The Saudi Ministry of Health. MOH: scientific names of drugs used in medical prescriptions, https://www.moh.gov.sa/en/Ministry/MediaCenter/News/Pages/news-2017-07-29-001.aspx (2017, accessed 14 June 2023).
62. Kerse N, Buetow S, Mainous AG, et al. Physician-patient relationship and medication compliance: a primary care investigation. Ann Fam Med 2004; 2: 455–461.
63. Neiman AB, Ruppar T, Ho M, et al. CDC Grand Rounds: improving medication adherence for chronic disease management — innovations and opportunities. Centers Dis Control Prev 2017; 66: 1248–1251.
64. Amaha ND, Weldemariam DG, Abdu N, et al. Prescribing practices using WHO prescribing indicators and factors associated with antibiotic prescribing in six community pharmacies in Asmara, Eritrea: a cross-sectional study. Antimicrob Resist Infect Control 2019; 8. Epub ahead of print 22 October 2019. https://doi.org/10.1186/S13756-019-0620-5.
65. Smith DRM, Dolk FCK, Smieszek T, et al. Understanding the gender gap in antibiotic prescribing: a cross-sectional analysis of English primary care. BMJ Open 2018; 8: e020203.
66. Mangione-Smith R, McGlynn EA, Elliott MN, et al. Parent expectations for antibiotics, physician-parent communication, and satisfaction. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2001; 155: 800–806.
67. Katz SE, Staub M, Ouedraogo Y, et al. Population-based assessment of patient and provider characteristics influencing pediatric outpatient antibiotic use in a high antibiotic-prescribing state. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2020; 41: 331–336.
68. Garout WA, Kurdi HS, Shilli AH, et al. Urinary tract infection in children younger than 5 years. Etiology and associated urological anomalies. Saudi Med J 2015; 36: 497–501.
69. Alanazi MQ, Al-Jeraisy MI, Salam M. Prevalence and predictors of antibiotic prescription errors in an emergency department, Central Saudi Arabia. Drug Healthc Patient Saf 2015; 7: 103–111.
70. Alrasheedy M, Abousada HJ, Abdulhaq MM, et al. Prevalence of urinary tract infection in children in the kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Arch Ital di Urol Androl Organo Uff [di] Soc Ital di Ecogr Urol e Nefrol 2021; 93: 206–210.
71. Atluri V, Marsland P, Johnson L, et al. 72. Improving antibiotic prescribing in interventional radiology using clinical decision support tools to assess penicillin allergies. Open Forum Infect Dis 2020; 7: 54.
72. Zarrinpar A, Kerlan RK. A guide to antibiotics for the interventional radiologist. Semin Intervent Radiol 2005; 22: 69–79.
73. Ryan JM, Ryan BM, Smith TP. Antibiotic prophylaxis in interventional radiology. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2004; 15: 547–556.
74. Alajmi AM, Alamoudi AA, Halwani AA, et al. Antimicrobial resistance awareness, antibiotics prescription errors and dispensing patterns by community pharmacists in Saudi Arabia. J Infect Public Health 2023; 16: 34–41.
75. The Saudi Ministry of Health. National antimicrobial therapy guidelines for community and hospital acquired infections in adults, https://www.moh.gov.sa/en/CCC/healthp/regulations/Documents/NationalAntimicrobialGuidelines.pdf (2018, accessed 3 June 2023).
76. The Saudi Ministry of Health. MOH launches a campaign to supervise dispensing of non-prescribed antibiotics, https://www.moh.gov.sa/en/Ministry/MediaCenter/News/Pages/news-2018-05-06-001.aspx (2018, accessed 3 June 2023).
77. The Saudi Ministry of Health. MOH therapeutic guidelines and protocols, https://www.moh.gov.sa/en/Ministry/MediaCenter/Publications/Pages/Protocols.aspx (2017, accessed 3 June 2023).
78. Saudi Food and Drug Authority. Antibiotics, https://www.sfda.gov.sa/en/node/7338 (2019, accessed 3 June 2023).
79. Saudi Food and Drug Authority. The optimal use of antibiotics, https://www.sfda.gov.sa/en/node/69408 (2021, accessed 3 June 2023).
80. Saudi Food and Drug Authority. ‘SFDA’ launches awareness campaign for the optimal use of antibiotics, https://www.sfda.gov.sa/en/news/48724 (2014, accessed 3 June 2023).
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material visualised and available to download via Figshare in the display box below. Where there are more than one item, you can scroll through each tab to see each separate item.
For Open Access articles published under Creative Commons License https://creativecommons.org/licenses/, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
