ArticlePloS one2017
"What they see is what you get": Prescribing antibiotics for respiratory tract infections in primary care: Do high prescribers diagnose differently? An analysis of German routine data.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Stewards for future: Piloting a medical undergraduate elective on antimicrobial stewardship.GMS journal for medical education · 2025Article
- Factors influencing antibiotic prescribing for respiratory tract infections in primary care - a comparison of physicians with different antibiotic prescribing rates.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2024Article
- Point-of-care testing and antibiotics prescribing in out-of-hours general practice: a register-based study in Denmark.BMC primary care · 2024Article
- Article
- Promoting rational antibiotic therapy among high antibiotic prescribers in German primary care-study protocol of the ElektRA 4-arm cluster-randomized controlled trial.Implementation science : IS · 2022Article
- A Choosing Wisely top-5 list to support general practitioners in Austria.Wiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946) · 2021Article
- Assessing Reduction of Antibiotic Prescribing for Acute, Non-Complicated Infections in Primary Care in Germany: Multi-Step Outcome Evaluation in the Cluster-Randomized Trial ARena.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Evaluation of a multimodal intervention to promote rational antibiotic use in primary care.Antimicrobial resistance and infection control · 2021Article
- [An online dynamic knowledge base in multiple languages on general medicine and primary care].The Pan African medical journal · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCharacteristics of high and low prescribers of antibiotics in German primary care were analysed using population data. We aimed to evaluate differences in prescribing rates and factors being associated with high prescribing, and whether high prescribers made the diagnosis of perceived bacterial infections more often.
methodsRoutine data were provided by the Bavarian Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians. Routine data are delivered by primary care practices on a quarterly basis. We analysed data from 2011 and 2012. Patients older than 15 years with respiratory tract infections consulting a primary care physician were selected (6.647 primary care practices). Patient and physician characteristics associated with high prescribing were identified using stepwise logistic regression.
resultsMean prescribing rate of antibiotics was 24.9%. Prescribing rate for high prescribers was 43.5% compared to 8.5% for low prescribers. High prescribers made the diagnosis of perceived bacterial infections more often (Mhigh = 64.5%, Mlow = 45.2%). In the adjusted regression model, perceived bacterial infections were strongly associated with high prescribing (OR = 13.9, 95% CI [10.2, 18.8]). Treating patients with comorbidities was associated with lower prescribing of antibiotics (OR = 0.6, 95% CI [0.4, 0.8]). High prescribers had a higher practice volume, a higher degree of prescribing dominance, and were situated more often in deprived areas and in rural settings.
interpretationCompared to findings of studies in other European countries, prescribing rates were low. There was a considerable difference between prescribing rates of high and low prescribers. Diagnostic labelling was the best predictor for high prescribing. Current guidelines recommend considering antibiotic treatment for patients with co-morbidities. In our study, treating a large number of high-risk patients was not associated with high prescribing.
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.