Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29157244›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2017

Antimicrobial stewardship: a qualitative study of the development of national guidelines for antibiotic use in hospitals.

Eli Feiring, Anne Berit Walter

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
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

2 authors.

Eli FeiringDepartment of Health Management and Health Economics, University of Oslo, Box 1089 Blindern, 0317, Oslo, PO, Norway. eli.feiring@medisin.uio.no.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5280-1051
Anne Berit WalterDepartment of Life Sciences and Health, Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences, Box 4 St Olavs Plass, 0130, Oslo, PO, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAs effective antibiotics are becoming a scarce resource, governmental regulation is needed to promote responsible use. Implementation of antibiotic stewardship and practice guidelines in health care facilities seems to be crucial to this effort. Empirical studies suggest, however, that guidelines have limited influence on health professionals' behavior and practice. Barriers and facilitators to guideline implementability are much studied, but little attention has been given to health professionals' perceptions of normative acceptability of guidelines as a condition for compliance. The aim of the present study was first, to examine if and how aspects potentially promoting acceptability and compliance among clinical target users were addressed during development of Norwegian national guidelines for antibiotic use in hospitals and second, to identify procedural characteristics of the development process that were perceived by target users to yield legitimate guidelines.

methodsQualitative deductive thematic analysis was used. A theoretical framework inspired by the AGREE II Instrument and the Accountability for reasonableness framework assisted data gathering and interpretation. Archival data was collected and used to detail the guideline development process. Semi-structured, in-depth interviews with eight clinicians with extensive knowledge of the guidelines were carried out.

resultsGuideline development was characterized by i) broad agreement about scope and purpose, ii) broad involvement of stakeholders in the development process, iii) use of systematic methods to search for and apply evidence, iv) easily identifiable and specific recommendations, v) provision of tools on how to put recommendations into practice, and vi) editorial independence. Several procedural characteristics were perceived by the interviewees as promoting guideline legitimacy; i) diverse perspectives systematically involved in the process, ii) accessibility and transparency of the rationales for decision making, iii) opportunities for appeals and reconsiderations, and iv) regulative authority.

conclusionsThis study provides insights as to how guidelines that are intended to promote responsible use of antibiotics in hospitals can be carefully developed to facilitate perceptions of relevance, transparency, and authority by health professionals.

Indexed as

Practice Guidelines as TopicAnti-Bacterial AgentsAntimicrobial StewardshipClinical Decision-MakingHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHealth PersonnelHealth ResourcesHospitalizationHospitalsHumansNorwayQualitative ResearchSocial ResponsibilityAnti-Bacterial AgentsAccountability for reasonablenessAntimicrobial resistanceEvidence-based public healthGuidelinesImplementationQualitative study

Identifiers

PMID29157244
PMCPMC5697115

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.