Trial reportBMC family practice2020
Promoting rational antibiotic prescribing for non-complicated infections: understanding social influence in primary care networks in Germany.
Trial report in BMC family practice, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Implementation fidelity in a multifaceted program to foster rational antibiotics use in primary care: an observational study.BMC medical research methodology · 2022Trial
- Peer effects on appropriate antibiotic prescribing within a patient-sharing physician network in China.Communications medicine · 2025Article
- Urinary tract infection in adults: gaps in current guidelines - opinions from an international multidisciplinary panel and relevance to clinical practice.BMC proceedings · 2025Article
- Drivers of district-level differences in outpatient antibiotic prescribing in Germany: a qualitative study with prescribers.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Can peer effects explain prescribing appropriateness? a social network analysis.BMC medical research methodology · 2023Article
- Contextual factors influencing physicians' perception of antibiotic prescribing in primary care in Germany - a prospective observational study.BMC health services research · 2022Observational
- Health workers' social networks and their influence in the adoption of strategies to address the stillbirth burden at a subnational level health system in Uganda.PLOS global public health · 2022Article
- 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
- Influence of physician networks on prescribing a new ingredient combination in heart failure: a longitudinal claim data-based study.Implementation science : IS · 2021Article
- Fostering Appropriate Antibiotic Use in a Complex Intervention: Mixed-Methods Process Evaluation Alongside the Cluster-Randomized Trial ARena.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrimary care networks in Germany are formalized regional collaborations of physicians and other healthcare providers. Common goals are optimized healthcare processes and services for patients, enhanced communication, agency for professional concerns and strengthened economic power. In the ARena study (Sustainable reduction of antibiotic-induced antimicrobial resistance), 14 primary care networks in two federal German states aimed to promote appropriate antibiotics use for acute non-complicated infections by fostering awareness and understanding. Factors related to the role of primary care networks were to be identified.
methodsFor this study, audio-recorded telephone interviews were conducted with physicians, non-physician health professionals and stakeholder representatives. Pseudonymized verbatim transcripts were coded using thematic analysis. In-depth analysis was based on the inductive categories 'social support', 'social learning', 'social normative pressures' and 'social contagion' to reflect social influence processes. Data generated through a survey with physicians and non-physician health professionals were analyzed descriptively to foster understanding of the networks' potential impact on antibiotic prescribing.
resultsSocial influence processes proved to be relevant regarding knowledge transfer, manifestation of best-practice care and self-reflection. Peer communication was seen as a great asset, the main reason for membership and affirmative for own perspectives. All interviewed physicians (n = 27) considered their network to be a strong support factor for daily routines, introduction of new routines, and continuity of care. They utilized network-offered training programs focusing on best practice guideline-oriented use of antibiotics and considered their networks supportive in dealing with patient expectations. A shared attitude combined with ARena intervention components facilitated reflective management of antibiotic prescribing. Non-physician health professionals (n = 11) also valued network peer exchange. They assumed their employers joined networks to offer improved and continuous care. Stakeholders (n = 7) expected networks and their members to be drivers for care optimization.
conclusionPrimary care networks play a crucial role in providing a platform for professional peer exchange, social support and reassurance. With regards to their impact on antibiotic prescribing for acute non-complicated infections, networks seem to facilitate and amplify quality improvement programs by providing a platform for refreshing awareness, knowledge and self-reflection among care providers. They are well suited to promote a rational use of antibiotics.
trial registrationISRCTN, ISRCTN58150046. Registered 24 August 2017.
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.