Study: Urgent Care Clinics Are Seriously Overprescribing Antibiotics

“Apparently, some patients have complained when I did not give an antibiotic.”

GMVozd/Getty

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

There’s a lot to like about standalone urgent care clinics. They offer many of the same services as a doctor’s office, but they don’t require appointments. They’re open evenings and weekends, and they’re usually easily accessible since they are often located in shopping centers or business districts. But there’s another important distinction: This week, a study found that urgent care clinics are much more likely than traditional healthcare facilities to prescribe unnecessary antibiotics. That practice, the researchers note, may contribute to the growing problem of antibiotic resistance, as more bacteria evolve to withstand the once-powerful drugs.    

A team of researchers from several institutions, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, analyzed millions of visits to all sorts of healthcare providers in 2014, which resulted in a diagnosis of a viral upper respiratory infection—the kind for which antibiotics are completely ineffective. The resulting study, published in the peer-reviewed JAMA Internal Medicine, found similar rates of antibiotic prescription at doctors’ offices and emergency rooms—17 percent and 25 percent, respectively. At urgent care clinics, however, the rate was 46 percent.

“That’s a whole lot of unnecessary antibiotics,” said JAMA Internal Medicine editor Rita Redberg, who was not involved in the study. She attributed some of the overprescribing to the fact that urgent care clinics simply see a greater volume of viral coughs and colds than do traditional facilities. But she suspected that other factors were also at playsuch as the lack of a more personal relationship between the physician and patient. If an unfamiliar doctor says the symptoms will go away on their own, the patient might not trust that advice. (And if the provider isn’t a doctor but a physician assistant or nurse practitioner, the patient might be even less inclined to listen.)

Another possible explanation, she says, is the “customer service model” of urgent care clinics. “Some doctors have said that they feel like patients are expecting antibiotics, or that if they prescribe something then the patient at least feels like something is done,” says Redberg. And the competition for customers at urgent care clinics is fierce. With 89.2 million patient visits a year, they’re now an $18 billion industry that’s projected to grow nearly 6 percent this year alone, according to the trade group Urgent Care Association. Visits to urgent care clinics now account for 18 percent of all primary care visits—likely at least in part because the United States has an acute shortage of primary care doctors.

Indeed, at the physician blog Kevin MD, one doctor shared his experience in 2013 working at an urgent care clinic. “Apparently, some patients have complained when I did not give an antibiotic,” he wrote. “Recently there was a newsletter basically encouraging antibiotics for any [upper respiratory infection]. I find this unethical. Someone got fired for not prescribing enough antibiotics.” 

When I asked the Urgent Care Association to comment on the study, it sent me a long list of the ways in which it encourages its members to follow appropriate prescribing practices. For example, it has partnered with universities and government agencies on antibiotic stewardship programs, and it added antibiotic prescribing “as a component of an organization’s overarching quality plan as part of UCA’s 2019 accreditation standards.” It also published a toolkit with information and resources for clinics on the subject.

But Redberg says the study demonstrates “that whatever they’re doing in terms of education isn’t enough.”

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate