Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32877460›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

A qualitative analysis of diagnostic testing, antibiotic selection, and quality improvement interventions for uncomplicated urinary tract infections.

Mark Pinkerton, Jahnavi Bongu, Aimee James, Jerry Lowder, Michael Durkin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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.

Mark PinkertonDivision of Hospital Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-5393-8930
Jahnavi BonguDivision of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America.
Aimee JamesDivision of Public Health Sciences, Department of Surgery, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America.
Jerry LowderDivision of Urogynecology and Female Pelvic Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America.
Michael DurkinDivision of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America.

Funding

Washington University Institute of Clinical and Translational Sciences (KL2) KL2TR002346 · NCATS · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI Dominic N Reeds · 2017 to 2026
$14.0M
NCATS NIH HHS KL2 TR002346NIAID NIH HHS L30 AI133778
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUncomplicated urinary tract infections (UTIs) can often be diagnosed based solely on symptoms and should be treated with a short course of narrow spectrum antibiotics. However, clinicians often order urine analyses and prescribe long courses of broad spectrum antibiotics.

objectiveThe objectives of our study are: 1) Understand how primary care providers and residents clinically approach UTIs and 2) to understand specific opportunities, based on provider type, to target future antibiotic stewardship interventions. DESIGN AND

participantsWe conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews of community primary care providers (n = 15) and internal medicine residents (n = 15) in St. Louis, Missouri from 2018-2019. A 5-point Likert scale was used to evaluate participant preferences for possible interventions. Interviews were transcribed, de-identified, and coded by two independent researchers using a combination inductive and deductive approach. KEY

resultsSeveral common themes emerged. Both providers and residents ordered urine tests to "confirm" presence of urinary tract infections. Antibiotic prescription decisions were often based on historical practice and anecdotal experience rather than local susceptibility data or clinical practice guidelines. Community providers were more comfortable treating patients over the phone than residents and tended to prescribe longer courses of antibiotics. Both community providers and residents voiced frustrations with guidelines being difficult to easily incorporate due to length and extraneous information. Preferences for receiving and incorporating guidelines into practice varied. Both groups felt benchmarking would improve prescribing practices but had reservations about implementation. Community providers preferred pragmatic clinical decision support systems and nurse triage algorithms. Residents preferred order sets.

conclusionsSignificant opportunities exist to optimize urinary tract infection management among residents and community providers. Multifaceted interventions that include provider education, synthesis of guidelines, and pragmatic clinical decision support systems are needed to improve antibiotic prescribing and diagnostic testing; optimal interventions to improve UTI management may vary based on provider training level.

Indexed as

AdultAnti-Bacterial AgentsAntimicrobial StewardshipDecision Support Systems, ClinicalDiagnostic Tests, RoutineFemaleHealth PersonnelHumansInappropriate PrescribingMaleMiddle AgedMissouriNursing HomesQuality ImprovementUrinary TractUrinary Tract InfectionsAnti-Bacterial Agents

Identifiers

PMID32877460
PMCPMC7467288

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.