Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23834882›Full record

Trial reportThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2013

Long-term effects of an educational seminar on antibiotic prescribing by GPs: a randomised controlled trial.

Philippe Le Corvoisier, Vincent Renard, Françoise Roudot-Thoraval, Thierry Cazalens, Kalaivani Veerabudun, Florence Canoui-Poitrine, Olivier Montagne, Claude Attali

Open access · bronzeAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Antibiotic overprescribing: who are the bad guys?The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2013
    Article
  18. Antibiotics: time to act.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2013
    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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Philippe Le CorvoisierINSERM, Clinical Investigation Centre 006, Créteil, France. philippe.lecorvoisier@hmn.aphp.fr
Vincent Renard
Françoise Roudot-Thoraval
Thierry Cazalens
Kalaivani Veerabudun
Florence Canoui-Poitrine
Olivier Montagne
Claude Attali
Inserm · FRHôpitaux Universitaires Henri-Mondor · FRParis-Est Sup · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHigh levels of outpatient antibiotic use remain observed in many European countries. Several studies have shown a strong relationship between antibiotic use and bacterial resistance.

aimTo assess the long-term effect of a standardised educational seminar on antibiotic prescriptions by GPs. DESIGN AND

settingRandomised controlled trial of 171 GPs (of 203 initially randomised) in France.

methodGPs in the control group (n = 99) received no antibiotic prescription recommendation. Intervention group GPs (n = 72) attended an interactive seminar presenting evidence-based guidelines on antibiotic prescription for respiratory infections. The proportion of prescriptions containing an antibiotic in each group and related costs were compared to the baseline up to 30 months following the intervention. Data were obtained from the National Health Insurance System database.

resultsIn the intervention group, 4-6 months after the intervention, there was a significant decrease in the proportion of prescriptions containing an antibiotic from 15.2 ± 5.4% to 12.3 ± 5.8% (-2.8% [95% CI = -3.8 to -1.9], P<0.001). By contrast, an increase was observed in controls from 15.3 ± 6.0 to 16.4 ± 6.7% (+1.1% [95% CI = +0.4 to +1.8], P<0.01), resulting in a between-group difference of 3.93% ([95% CI = 2.75 to 5.11], P<0.001). The between-group difference was maintained 30 months after intervention (1.99% [95% CI = 0.56 to 3.42], P<0.01). Persistence of the intervention effect over the entire study period was confirmed in a hierarchical multivariate analysis.

conclusionThis randomised trial shows that a standardised and interactive educational seminar results in a long-term reduction in antibiotic prescribing and could justify a large-scale implementation of this intervention.

Indexed as

Drug PrescriptionsAnti-Bacterial AgentsBacterial InfectionsCost-Benefit AnalysisDrug Resistance, MicrobialEducation, Medical, ContinuingFemaleFranceGeneral PracticeGeneral PractitionersGuideline AdherenceHumansMalePractice Guidelines as TopicPractice Patterns, Physicians'Prospective StudiesAnti-Bacterial Agents

Identifiers

PMID23834882
PMCPMC3693802
OpenAlexW1972244081

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.