ArticleBMC public health2020
The influence of a ban on outpatient intravenous antibiotic therapy among the secondary and tertiary hospitals in China.
Article in BMC public health, 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.
- Outpatient Parenteral Antimicrobial Therapy in Asia: Evolution, Models, and Challenges over the Past Decade-A Narrative Review.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Administrative interventions in antimicrobial stewardship: a global scoping review of all WHO regions.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Review
- Impact of pharmaceutical intervention on the use of intravenous antibiotics in patients with bacterial upper respiratory tract infections: protocol for a cluster-randomized controlled trial.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Oral versus intravenous antibiotics: Oral antibiotics are more cost-effective and may be safer than intravenous antibiotics for most infections in stable adults.African journal of primary health care & family medicine · 2025Review
- Implementing the Chinese mandatory antimicrobial stewardship program: barriers to continuous improvement.Health policy and planning · 2025Article
- Evaluating the Impact of Interventions and Improvements in Outpatient Intravenous Infusion Therapy at a Hospital in China: A Comprehensive Analysis of Prescription Patterns and Safety Measures.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2024Article
- An overview and visual analysis of research on government regulation in healthcare.Frontiers in public health · 2023Review
- Dietary supplementation with a complex of cinnamaldehyde, carvacrol, and thymol negatively affects the intestinal function in LPS-challenged piglets.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2023Article
- Attitudes and Practices of the Use of Third-Generation Cephalosporins among Medical Doctors Practicing in Cameroon.International journal of clinical practice · 2023Article
- Antibiotic resistant bacteria: A bibliometric review of literature.Frontiers in public health · 2022Review
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
backgroundAntimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a serious global public health challenge. Physicians' over-prescription of antibiotics is a major contributor, and intravenous (IV) antibiotic use has been a particular concern in China. To address the rapid fallout of antibiotic overuse, the Chinese government has piloted a ban of IV antibiotics in the outpatient department (OD) with the exemption of paediatrics, emergency department (ED), and inpatient ward of secondary and tertiary hospitals in several provinces.
methodsTo assess the potential impact of the policy, we conducted a mixed-methods study including 1) interviews about the ban of IV antibiotic use with 68 stakeholders, covering patients, health workers, and policy-makers, from two cities and 2) a hospital case study which collected routine hospital data and survey data with 207 doctors.
resultsOur analyses revealed that the ban of IV antibiotics in the OD led to a reduction in the total and IV antibiotic prescriptions and improved the rational antibiotic prescribing practice in the OD. Nevertheless, the policy has diverted patient flow from OD to ED, inpatient ward, and primary care for IV antibiotic prescriptions. We also found that irrational antibiotic use in paediatrics was neglected. Radical policy implementation, doctors circumvented the regulations, and lack of doctor-patient communication during patient encounters were barriers to the implementation of the ban.
conclusionsFuture efforts may include 1) to de-escalate both oral and IV antibiotic therapy in paediatric and reduce oral antibiotic therapy among adults in outpatient clinics, 2) to reduce unnecessary referrals by OD doctors to ED, primary care, or inpatient services and better coordinate for patients who clinically need IV antibiotics, 3) to incorporate demand-side tailored measures, such as public education campaigns, and 4) to improve doctor-patient communication. Future research is needed to understand how primary care and other community clinics implement the ban.
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.