RT Journal Article SR Electronic T1 Antibiotic prescribing records in two UK primary care electronic health record systems. Comparison of the CPRD GOLD and CPRD Aurum databases JF medRxiv FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press SP 2020.03.07.20028290 DO 10.1101/2020.03.07.20028290 A1 Martin C Gulliford A1 Xiaohui Sun A1 Thamina Anjuman A1 Eleanor Yelland A1 Tarita Murray-Thomas YR 2020 UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/03/10/2020.03.07.20028290.abstract AB Objective We evaluated whether recording of antibiotic prescribing across two primary care electronic health record (EHR) systems is similar. Data were analysed from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) databases: CPRD GOLD (Vision data) and CPRD Aurum (EMIS data).Methods Cohorts of patients were randomly sampled from both databases, stratifying by general practice, age-group and gender. All antibiotic prescriptions in 2017 were identified. Age- and sex-standardised antibiotic prescribing rates per 1,000 person years were calculated. Prescribing of individual antibiotic products and associated medical diagnosis recorded on the same date was also evaluated. English CPRD GOLD general practices were analysed as a subgroup, because all CPRD Aurum practices sampled were in England.Results There were 101,360 antibiotic prescriptions among 158,305 sampled patients at 883 CPRD Aurum practices, and 112,931 prescriptions among 160,394 sampled patients at 290 CPRD GOLD practices. The age- and sex-standardised antibiotic prescribing rate in 2017 was 512.6 (95% confidence interval 510.4 to 514.9) per 1,000 person years in CPRD Aurum and 584.3 (582.1 to 586.5) per 1,000 person years in CPRD GOLD [505.2 (501.6 to 508.9) per 1,000 person years if restricted to practices in England]. The 25 most frequently prescribed antibiotic products were similar in both databases. One or more medical codes were recorded on the same date as an antibiotic prescription for 72,989 (74%) prescriptions in CPRD Aurum, 84,756 (78%) in CPRD GOLD, and 28,471 (78%) for CPRD GOLD in England. Skin, respiratory and genito-urinary tract infections were recorded for 39,035 (40%) prescriptions in CPRD Aurum, 41,326 (38%) in CPRD GOLD, with 15,481 (42%) in English CPRD GOLD practices only.Conclusion Similar estimates for antibiotic prescribing and infection recording were found for both databases suggesting similar recording across EMIS and Vision systems. Future research on antimicrobial stewardship can be conducted in CPRD Aurum informed by previous results from CPRD GOLD. It may also be possible to combine CPRD GOLD and CPRD Aurum data in research on antibiotic prescribing.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThe study is funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Programme (16/116/46). MG was supported by the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre at Guy’s and St Thomas’ Hospitals. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR, or the Department of Health. The funder of the study had no role in study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation, or writing of the report. The authors had full access to all the data in the study and all authors shared final responsibility for the decision to submit for publication.Author DeclarationsAll relevant ethical guidelines have been followed; any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained and details of the IRB/oversight body are included in the manuscript.YesAll necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI 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).YesI 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.YesRequests for access to data from the study should be addressed to martin.gulliford{at}kcl.ac.uk. All proposals requesting data access will need to specify planned uses with approval of the study team and CPRD before data release.