ArticleDer Urologe. Ausg. A2017
[Nationwide survey among institutes of microbiology in academic medicine : Is the interdisciplinary approach the right way to treat patients with urogenital infections?]
Article in Der Urologe. Ausg. A, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIncreasing antibiotic resistance is a current and severe problem in medicine, especially in urology. Multidisciplinary antibiotic stewardship programmes are an important approach to counteract increasing resistance rates. This approach includes collaboration between urologists and microbiologists.
objectivesThe primary endpoint was to describe the current setting of interdisciplinary work of urologists and microbiologists in university hospitals in Germany. The secondary endpoints were the identification of problems of this interdisciplinary approach in daily routine and implications for the future in patient treatment. MATERIALS AND
methodsA newly developed, 24-item questionnaire was sent to 34 German microbiology departments at medical universities between June and October 2016; the departments were contacted up to four times. Only complete questionnaires were included in our analysis.
resultsThe response rate was 50.0%. In the majority of the urological cases a microbiologist was only contacted sporadically and asked for advice, but on the other hand most of the microbiologists think that this contact and discussion about the patient is reasonable and preferable. Of the respondents, 82.4% think that with a consequent interdisciplinary approach there might be lower antibiotic resistance rates in the future. One essential problem of ideal microbial diagnostics and therapeutic advice is that the microbiologist does not receive all relevant information upon request. This might be the case in up to 76.5%. Other problems are of economic nature or shortage of manpower.
conclusionInterdisciplinary patient care between urologists and microbiologists is reasonable and preferable. This approach has the potential of decreasing antibiotic resistance rates in the future.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.