Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28298366›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2017

Antibiotics for acute respiratory tract infections: a mixed-methods study of patient experiences of non-medical prescriber management.

Molly Courtenay, Samantha Rowbotham, Rosemary Lim, Rhian Deslandes, Karen Hodson, Katie MacLure, Sarah Peters, Derek Stewart

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Revisiting patient expectations and experiences of antibiotics in an era of antimicrobial resistance: Qualitative study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2020
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Molly CourtenaySchool of Healthcare Sciences, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.
Samantha RowbothamMenzies Centre for Health Policy, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Rosemary LimReading School of Pharmacy, Reading, UK.
Rhian DeslandesCardiff School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.
Karen HodsonCardiff School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.
Katie MacLureSchool of Pharmacy and Life Sciences, Robert Gordon University, Aberdeen, UK.
Sarah PetersManchester Centre for Health Psychology, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Derek StewartSchool of Pharmacy and Life Sciences, Robert Gordon University, Aberdeen, UK.
Cardiff University · GBRobert Gordon University · GBThe Australian Prevention Partnership Centre · AUUniversity of Manchester · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo (1) explore patients' expectations and experiences of nurse and pharmacist non-medical prescriber-led management of respiratory tract infections (RTIs), (2) examine whether patient expectations for antibiotics affect the likelihood of receiving them and (3) understand factors influencing patient satisfaction with RTI consultations.

designMixed methods.

settingPrimary care.

participantsQuestionnaires from 120 patients and follow-up interviews with 22 patients and 16 nurse and pharmacist non-medical prescribers (NMPs).

resultsPatients had multiple expectations of their consultation with 43% expecting to be prescribed an antibiotic. There was alignment between self-reported patient expectations and those perceived by NMPs. Patient expectations for non-antibiotic strategies, such as education to promote self-management, were associated with receipt of those strategies, whereas patient expectations for an antibiotic were not associated with receipt of these medications. 'Patient-centred' management strategies (including reassurance and providing information) were received by 86.7% of patients. Regardless of patients' expectations or the management strategy employed, high levels of satisfaction were reported for all aspects of the consultation. Taking concerns seriously, conducting a physical examination, communicating the treatment plan, explaining treatment decisions and lack of time restrictions were each reported to contribute to patient satisfaction.

conclusionsNMPs demonstrate an understanding of patient expectations of RTI consultations and use a range of non-antibiotic management strategies, particularly those resembling a patient-centred approach. Overall, patients' expectations were met and prescribers were not unduly influenced by patient expectations for an antibiotic. Patients were satisfied with the consultation, indicating that strategies used by NMPs were acceptable. However, the lower levels of satisfaction among patients who expected but did not receive an antibiotic indicates that although NMPs appear to have strategies for managing RTI consultations, there is still scope for improvement and these prescribers are therefore an important group to involve in antimicrobial stewardship.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CareDrug PrescriptionsNursesPatient SatisfactionPharmacistsAcute DiseaseAdultAgedAnti-Bacterial AgentsAttitude of Health PersonnelDisease ManagementFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPhysiciansAnti-Bacterial AgentsRESPIRATORY MEDICINE (see Thoracic Medicine)

Identifiers

PMID28298366
PMCPMC5353344
OpenAlexW2595661535

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.