Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21967276›Full record

ArticleBMC family practice2011

Antimicrobial management and appropriateness of treatment of urinary tract infection in general practice in Ireland.

Akke Vellinga, Martin Cormican, Belinda Hanahoe, Kathleen Bennett, Andrew W Murphy

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC family practice, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Intervention to improve the quality of antimicrobial prescribing for urinary tract infection: a cluster randomized trial.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2016
    Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Hospital admission after primary care consultation for community-onset lower urinary tract infection: a cohort study of risks and predictors using linked data.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Variations in presentation, management, and patient outcomes of urinary tract infection: a prospective four-country primary care observational cohort study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2017
    Observational
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Sterile pyuria: a practical management guide.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2016
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Akke VellingaDiscipline of General Practice, School of Medicine, NUI Galway, Ireland. akke.vellinga@nuigalway.ie.
Martin Cormican
Belinda Hanahoe
Kathleen Bennett
Andrew W Murphy
Ollscoil na Gaillimhe – University of Galway · IETrinity College Dublin · IEUniversity Hospital Galway · IE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

abstract

backgroundUrinary tract infections (UTIs) are the second most common bacterial infections in general practice and a frequent indication for prescription of antimicrobials. Increasing concern about the association between the use of antimicrobials and acquired antimicrobial resistance has highlighted the need for rational pharmacotherapy of common infections in general practice.

methodsManagement of urinary tract infections in general practice was studied prospectively over 8 weeks. Patients presenting with suspected UTI submitted a urine sample and were enrolled with an opt-out methodology. Data were collected on demographic variables, previous antimicrobial use and urine samples. Appropriateness of different treatment scenarios was assessed by comparing treatment with the laboratory report of the urine sample.

resultsA total of 22 practices participated in the study and included 866 patients. Bacteriuria was established for 21% of the patients, pyuria without bacteriuria for 9% and 70% showed no laboratory evidence of UTI. An antimicrobial agent was prescribed to 56% (481) of the patients, of whom 33% had an isolate, 11% with pyuria only and 56% without laboratory evidence of UTI. When taking all patients into account, 14% patients had an isolate identified and were prescribed an antimicrobial to which the isolate was susceptible. The agents most commonly prescribed for UTI were co-amoxyclav (33%), trimethoprim (26%) and fluoroquinolones (17%). Variation between practices in antimicrobial prescribing as well as in their preference for certain antimicrobials, was observed. Treatment as prescribed by the GP was interpreted as appropriate for 55% of the patients. Three different treatment scenarios were simulated, i.e. if all patients who received an antimicrobial were treated with nitrofurantoin, trimethoprim or ciprofloxacin only. Treatment as prescribed by the GP was no more effective than treatment with nitrofurantoin for all patients given an antimicrobial or treatment with ciprofloxacin in all patients. Prescribing cost was lower for nitrofurantoin. Empirical treatment of all patients with trimethoprim only was less effective due to the higher resistance levels.

conclusionsThere appears to be considerable scope to reduce the frequency and increase the quality of antimicrobial prescribing for patients with suspected UTI.

Identifiers

PMID21967276
PMCPMC3191331
OpenAlexW2163344225

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.