Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19640941›Full record

Trial reportBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2009

Effect of using an interactive booklet about childhood respiratory tract infections in primary care consultations on reconsulting and antibiotic prescribing: a cluster randomised controlled trial.

Nick A Francis, Christopher C Butler, Kerenza Hood, Sharon Simpson, Fiona Wood, Jacqueline Nuttall

3 registry-linked trialsOpen access · hybridAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 3 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 121 papers, 18 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
121citing papers in PubMed, 18 pooled it
9.3field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT01398696 phase4completednot on this map

Impact of Four Patient Information Leaflets (PIL) on Patient Behaviour : a Randomised Controlled Trial in Primary Care.

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity Hospital, GrenobleRan2009 to 2011Enrolled400ConditionsGastroenteritis, PharyngitisArmsPatient Information Leaflets, usual consultation
NCT02024282 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2013, after this paper: background citation

Validation of a Vital Signs and Symptoms Decision Tree and the Effect of a Point-of- Care CRP Test, Oxygen Saturation, a Brief Intervention and a Parent Leaflet on Diagnosing, Antibiotic Prescribing Rate and Parental Satisfaction in Acutely Ill Children in Primary Care."

TypeinterventionalSponsorKU LeuvenRan2013 to 2014Enrolled8,962ConditionsSepsis, Bacteraemia, Meningitis, AbscessArmsUse of C-reactive protein (CRP) point of care test, Brief intervention and parent leaflet, Finger Pulse Oximeter
NCT02246361 phase4completednot on this mapstarted 2014, after this paper: background citation

Impact of Six Patient Information Leaflets (PIL) on Doctor Patient Communication and Adherence in Emergency Ward

TypeinterventionalSponsorFloralisRan2014 to 2015Enrolled211ConditionsAnkle Sprain, Infectious Colitis, Diverticulitis, PyelonephritisArmsPatient Information Leaflet (PIL)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

121 citing papers in PubMed, 18 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 256 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Effectiveness of safety-netting approaches for acutely ill children: a network meta-analysis.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025
    Pooled it
  3. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Digital interventions for parents of acutely ill children and their treatment-seeking behaviour: a systematic review.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2020
    Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. How best to use and evaluate Patient Information Leaflets given during a consultation: a systematic review of literature reviews.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2017
    Pooled it
  10. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017
    Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Pooled it
  16. Reducing antibiotic prescribing for children with respiratory tract infections in primary care: a systematic review.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2013
    Pooled it
  17. Pooled it
  18. Pooled it
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

61 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Nick A FrancisDepartment of Primary Care and Public Health, School of Medicine, Cardiff University, Neuadd Meirionnydd, Heath Park, Cardiff CF14 4XN. francisna@cf.ac.uk
Christopher C Butler
Kerenza Hood
Sharon Simpson
Fiona Wood
Jacqueline Nuttall
Cardiff University · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo establish whether an interactive booklet on respiratory tract infections in children reduces reconsultation for the same illness episode, reduces antibiotic use, and affects future consulting intentions, while maintaining parental satisfaction with care.

designPragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial.

setting61 general practices in Wales and England.

participants558 children (6 months to 14 years) presenting to primary care with an acute respiratory tract infection (7 days or less). Children with suspected pneumonia, asthma or a serious concomitant illness, or needing immediate hospital admission were excluded. Three withdrew and 27 were lost to follow-up, leaving 528 (94.6%) with main outcome data.

interventionsClinicians in the intervention group were trained in the use of an interactive booklet on respiratory tract infections and asked to use the booklet during consultations with recruited patients (and provide it as a take home resource). Clinicians in the control group conducted their consultations as usual.

main outcome measuresThe proportion of children who attended a face-to-face consultation about the same illness during the two week follow-up period. Secondary outcomes included antibiotic prescribing, antibiotic consumption, future consulting intentions, and parental satisfaction, reassurance, and enablement.

resultsReconsultation occurred in 12.9% of children in the intervention group and 16.2% in the control group (absolute risk reduction 3.3%, 95% confidence interval -2.7% to 9.3%, P=0.29). Using multilevel modelling (at the practice and individual level) to account for clustering, no significant difference in reconsulting was noted (odds ratio 0.75; 0.41 to 1.38). Antibiotics were prescribed at the index consultation to 19.5% of children in the intervention group and 40.8% of children in the control group (absolute risk reduction 21.3%, 95% confidence interval 13.7 to 28.9), P<0.001). A significant difference was still present after adjusting for clustering (odds ratio 0.29; 0.14 to 0.60). There was also a significant difference in the proportion of parents who said they would consult in the future if their child developed a similar illness (odds ratio 0.34; 0.20 to 0.57). Satisfaction, reassurance, and parental enablement scores were not significantly different between the two groups.

conclusionsUse of a booklet on respiratory tract infections in children within primary care consultations led to important reductions in antibiotic prescribing and reduced intention to consult without reducing satisfaction with care.

trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN46104365.

Indexed as

PamphletsAnti-Bacterial AgentsChild, PreschoolCluster AnalysisCommunicationEnglandFamily PracticeFemaleHealth EducationHumansMaleParentsPatient Acceptance of Health CarePractice Patterns, Physicians'Respiratory Tract InfectionsWalesAnti-Bacterial Agents

Identifiers

PMID19640941
PMCPMC2718088
OpenAlexW2136788730

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.