Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32672150›Full record

ArticleEuro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin2020

Proxy indicators to estimate appropriateness of antibiotic prescriptions by general practitioners: a proof-of-concept cross-sectional study based on reimbursement data, north-eastern France 2017.

Nathalie Thilly, Ouarda Pereira, Jeroen Schouten, Marlies Ejl Hulscher, Céline Pulcini

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Euro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing 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

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
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

5 authors.

Nathalie ThillyUniversité de Lorraine, Adaptation, mesure et évaluation en santé. Approches interdisciplinaires (APEMAC), Nancy, France.
Ouarda PereiraDirection Régionale du Service Médical du Nord-Est, Nancy, France.
Jeroen SchoutenRadboud University Medical Center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Scientific Center for Quality of Healthcare (IQ healthcare), Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Marlies Ejl HulscherRadboud University Medical Center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Scientific Center for Quality of Healthcare (IQ healthcare), Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Céline PulciniUniversité de Lorraine, Adaptation, mesure et évaluation en santé. Approches interdisciplinaires (APEMAC), Nancy, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BackgroundIn most countries, including France, data on clinical indications for outpatient antibiotic prescriptions are not available, making it impossible to assess appropriateness of antibiotic use at prescription level.AimOur objectives were to: (i) propose proxy indicators (PIs) to estimate appropriateness of antibiotic use at general practitioner (GP) level based on routine reimbursement data; and (ii) assess PIs' performance scores and their clinimetric properties using a large regional reimbursement database.MethodsA recent systematic literature review on quality indicators was the starting point for defining a set of PIs, taking French national guidelines into account. We performed a cross-sectional study analysing National Health Insurance data (available at prescriber and patient levels) on antibiotics prescribed by GPs in 2017 for individuals living in north-eastern France. We measured performance scores of the PIs and their case-mix stability, and tested their measurability, applicability, and room for improvement (clinimetric properties).ResultsThe 3,087 GPs included in this study prescribed a total of 2,077,249 antibiotic treatments. We defined 10 PIs with specific numerators, denominators and targets. Performance was low for almost all indicators ranging from 9% to 75%, with values < 30% for eight of 10 indicators. For all PIs, we found large variation between GPs and patient populations (case-mix stability). Regarding clinimetric properties, all PIs were measurable, applicable, and showed high improvement potential.ConclusionsThe set of 10 PIs showed satisfactory clinimetric properties and might be used to estimate appropriateness of antibiotic prescribing in primary care, in an automated way within antibiotic stewardship programmes.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAnti-Bacterial AgentsCross-Sectional StudiesDrug PrescriptionsFemaleFranceGeneral PractitionersGuideline AdherenceHumansInappropriate PrescribingMaleMiddle AgedPractice Patterns, Physicians'Primary Health CareReimbursement, IncentiveAnti-Bacterial Agentsantibiotic stewardshipbenchmarkinggeneral practitioners, prescriptionsperformanceprimary care

Identifiers

PMID32672150
PMCPMC7364760

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.