Background Inappropriate use of antimicrobial agents in healthcare settings is one area that has received attention as a possible route to mitigate the threat of antimicrobial resistance. Globally, the highest consumption of antimicrobials in human healthcare originates from prescriptions in Primary Care. Strategies to increase appropriate antibiotic prescribing, which can mean not prescribing an antibiotic e.g. cases of viral infection, have been developed and evaluated. This systematic review aims to review the literature of studies of group based in person educational interventions designed to increase appropriate antibiotic prescribing behaviours in General Practice settings. Methods EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE and PsycINFO will be systematically searched from inception until February 2024 for primary studies of group based educational interventions designed to improve the antimicrobial prescribing behaviours in General Practice. Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods studies that report on the phenomenon of interest will be included. All identified articles will be double screened at title and abstract level. One reviewer will then screen all included studies at full text level, extract the data, code the intervention and perform risk of bias assessment with a second reviewer performing verification of a randomly selected 20% of the articles. We will use an integrated approach to mixed method systematic reviews and will perform a narrative, or if possible quantitative, synthesis. Discussion The review will identify and assess the efficacy and / or effectiveness of small group based educational interventions designed to improve the antibiotic prescribing behaviours of General Practitioners. By using a mixed methods approach we aim to identify the salient content of the included interventions and the perspectives of participants on the content and delivery of the included interventions. We will use the findings to inform the design and content of a small group educational intervention for GP registrars.

Objective This scoping review aims to synthesise the extent and type of evidence on behaviour change interventions which address antibiotic treatment seeking behaviour for respiratory tract infections in primary care and/or community care settings. Introduction Antimicrobial Resistance is recognised as a global health and economic threat by the World Health Organization and World Bank. Multiple factors, including patient and public demand, may contribute to unnecessary prescribing practices, which can lead to an overuse of antibiotics, and affect AMR. Current policy initiatives acknowledge the need to prepare for the future by managing public expectations regarding antibiotics, especially for influenza-like illness and other respiratory tract infections. These initiatives emphasise the importance of designing and evaluating effective interventions that generate actionable knowledge for policy and practices related to the appropriate use of antibiotics. Behaviour change interventions, in this context, can aim to modify patients' attitudes, beliefs, and behaviours regarding antibiotics. Inclusion criteria Identified studies will describe behaviour change interventions aimed at potential patients and/or carers within the primary care and/or community care setting that address antibiotic treatment seeking behaviour for respiratory tract infections. Methods This scoping review will search the literature in Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science Core Collection, Scopus, EThOS, and Google Scholar to explore behaviour change interventions used to reduce expectations of antibiotics for respiratory tract infections in primary care. This review will follow the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines for scoping reviews. It will be reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews.

Objective:This scoping review aims to synthesise the extent and type of evidence on behaviour change interventions which address antibiotic treatment seeking behaviour for respiratory tract infections in primary care and/or community care settings. Introduction:Antimicrobial Resistance is recognised as a global health and economic threat by the World Health Organization and World Bank. Multiple factors, including patient and public demand, may contribute to unnecessary prescribing practices, which can lead to an overuse of antibiotics, and affect AMR. Current policy initiatives acknowledge the need to prepare for the future by managing public expectations regarding antibiotics, especially for influenza-like illness and other respiratory tract infections. These initiatives emphasise the importance of designing and evaluating effective interventions that generate actionable knowledge for policy and practices related to the appropriate use of antibiotics. Behaviour change interventions, in this context, can aim to modify patients' attitudes, beliefs, and behaviours regarding antibiotics. Inclusion criteria:Identified studies will describe behaviour change interventions aimed at potential patients and/or carers within the primary care and/or community care setting that address antibiotic treatment seeking behaviour for respiratory tract infections. Methods:This scoping review will search the literature in Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science Core Collection, Scopus, EThOS, and Google Scholar to explore behaviour change interventions used to reduce expectations of antibiotics for respiratory tract infections in primary care. This review will follow the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines for scoping reviews. It will be reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews.

Background: Antimicrobial resistance (AmR) is widely considered a global health threat and is associated with significant morbidity, mortality and costs. Inappropriate antimicrobial use is the most important modifiable risk factor for AmR. Most human antimicrobial medicines use occurs in primary care [prescribed by general practitioners (GPs), dispensed by community pharmacists (CPs)]. However, up to 50% of use is deemed inappropriate. Point-of-care diagnostic tests are used as a basis for antimicrobial stewardship interventions to improve the diagnostic certainty of respiratory tract infections (RTIs), and therefore ensure prudent antimicrobial use. However, there is a lack of guidance on their use, and they are therefore not routinely used in clinical practice. Objective: A scoping review will be conducted to synthesise the available evidence to inform the development of best practice guidance for using point-of-care diagnostics in the management of RTIs in primary care. Methods: A scoping review will be conducted following guidance from the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) and reported using the PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Databases including Web of Science, MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, the International HTA database and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, as well as grey literature, will be searched. Screening will be undertaken independently by two reviewers to identify studies and literature reporting the use of point-of-care diagnostics in the management of RTIs in primary care by GPs and/ or CPs. Findings will be described using narrative synthesis. Conclusion: The findings of this scoping review will be used to produce draft guidance on the use of point-of-care diagnostic tests in primary care, which will undergo further development using a Delphi consensus methodology involving experts in the field of RTIs, antimicrobial stewardship, point-of-care diagnostics and primary care.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on pharmacy education worldwide has been immense, affecting students, educators and regulatory agencies. Pharmacy programmes have had to rapidly adapt in their delivery of education, maintaining standards while also ensuring the safety of all stakeholders. In this commentary, we describe the challenges, compromises and solutions adopted by our institution throughout the pandemic, the lessons learnt, adaptive measures taken, and strategies to develop and future-proof our curricula.

Abstract Background Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) in research aims to improve the quality, relevance and appropriateness of research. PPI has an established role in clinical research where there is evidence of benefit, and where policymakers and funders place continued emphasis on its inclusion. However, for preclinical research, PPI has not yet achieved the same level of integration. As more researchers, including our team, aim to include PPI in preclinical research, the development of an evidence‐based approach is important. Therefore, this scoping review aimed to identify and map studies where PPI has been used in preclinical research and develop principles that can be applied in other projects. Methods A scoping review was conducted to search the literature in Medline (PubMed), EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycInfo and Web of Science Core Collection to identify applied examples of preclinical PPI. Two independent reviewers conducted study selection and data extraction separately. Data were extracted relating to PPI in terms of (i) rationale and aims, (ii) approach used, (iii) benefits and challenges, (iv) impact and evaluation and (v) learning opportunities for preclinical PPI. Findings were reviewed collaboratively by PPI contributors and the research team to identify principles that could be applied to other projects. Results Nine studies were included in the final review with the majority of included studies reporting PPI to improve the relevance of their research, using approaches such as PPI advisory panels and workshops. Researchers report several benefits and challenges, although evidence of formal evaluation is limited. Conclusion Although currently there are few examples of preclinical research studies reporting empirical PPI activity, their findings may support those aiming to use PPI in preclinical research. Through collaborative analysis of the scoping review findings, several principles were developed that may be useful for other preclinical researchers. Patient or Public Contribution This study was conducted as part of a broader project aiming to develop an evidence base for preclinical PPI that draws on a 5‐year preclinical research programme focused on the development of advanced biomaterials for spinal cord repair as a case study. A PPI Advisory Panel comprising seriously injured rugby players, clinicians, preclinical researchers and PPI facilitators collaborated as co‐authors on the conceptualization, execution and writing of this review, including refining the findings into the set of principles reported here.

Introduction: Patient and public involvement (PPI) aims to improve the quality, relevance, and appropriateness of research and ensure that it meets the needs and expectations of those affected by particular conditions to the greatest possible degree. The evidence base for the positive impact of PPI on clinical research continues to grow, but the role of PPI in preclinical research (an umbrella term encompassing ‘basic’, ‘fundamental’, ‘translational’ or ‘lab-based’ research) remains limited. As funding bodies and policymakers continue to increase emphasis on the relevance of PPI to preclinical research, it is timely to map the PPI literature to support preclinical researchers involving the public, patients, or other service users in their research. Therefore, the aim of this scoping review is to explore the literature on patient and public involvement in preclinical research from any discipline. Methods: This scoping review will search the literature in Medline (PubMed), Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science Core Collection, Scopus, and OpenGrey.net to explore the application of PPI in preclinical research. This review will follow the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) guidelines for scoping reviews. It will be reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). Two reviewers will independently review articles for inclusion in the final review. Data extraction will be guided by the research questions. The PPI advisory panel will then collaboratively identify themes in the extracted data. Discussion: This scoping review will provide a map of current evidence surrounding preclinical PPI, and identify the body of literature on this topic, which has not been comprehensively reviewed to date. Findings will inform ongoing work of the research team, support the work of other preclinical researchers aiming to include PPI in their own research, and identify knowledge and practice gaps. Areas for future research will be identified.