Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22152745›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2011

Managing self-limiting respiratory tract infections: a qualitative study of the usefulness of the delayed prescribing strategy.

Sarah Peters, Samantha Rowbotham, Anna Chisholm, Alison Wearden, Susie Moschogianis, Lis Cordingley, David Baker, Catherine Hyde, Carolyn Chew-Graham

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Antibiotic prescribing for acute respiratory tract infections in primary care: an updated and expanded meta-ethnography.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2018
    Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Effects on antibiotic dispensing rates of interventions to promote delayed prescribing for respiratory tract infections in primary care.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2013
    Trial
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Sarah PetersSchool of Psychological Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. sarah.peters@manchester.ac.uk
Samantha Rowbotham
Anna Chisholm
Alison Wearden
Susie Moschogianis
Lis Cordingley
David Baker
Catherine Hyde
Carolyn Chew-Graham

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite respiratory tract infections usually being viral and self-limiting, most primary care consultations still result in an antibiotic prescription. The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) introduced the 'delayed prescribing' (DP) strategy. It remains unknown how useful UK clinicians find this approach.

aimTo investigate how DP is used within UK primary care, and the benefits and challenges associated with this strategy. DESIGN AND

settingQualitative interview and focus group study in UK scheduled and unscheduled care primary care settings.

methodData were gathered through semi-structured interviews (n = 49) and six focus groups with GPs, trainee GPs, and nurse prescribers (NPs). An iterative analysis approach, using grounded theory principles, was used to generate themes from the dataset.

resultsPrescribers were familiar with DP but used it infrequently. DP was often used to manage diagnostic uncertainty, although NPs, trainee GPs, and GPs working in unscheduled care services preferred patients to reconsult under these circumstances. Prescribers used DP to avoid conflict, although some had found more effective strategies to achieve this. Prescribers were generally uncomfortable giving clinical responsibility to patients, and DP was perceived to communicate a conflicting message to patients about antibiotic efficacy.

conclusionDP was not considered to be a helpful strategy for managing patients with self-limiting respiratory tract infections within primary care and the findings do not support the centrality of DP in NICE guidelines as a primary means of reducing antibiotic prescribing. Future training and guidelines should encourage alternative ways of communicating empathy, addressing patient beliefs, and encouraging self-management.

Indexed as

Practice Patterns, Physicians'AdultAgedAnti-Bacterial AgentsDrug PrescriptionsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPrescription DrugsQualitative ResearchRespiratory Tract InfectionsTime FactorsUnited KingdomYoung AdultAnti-Bacterial AgentsPrescription Drugs

Identifiers

PMID22152745
PMCPMC3162181

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.