Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35314431›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2022

Non-antibiotic treatment of acute urinary tract infection in primary care: a qualitative study.

Oghenekome A Gbinigie, Sarah Tonkin-Crine, Christoper C Butler, Carl J Heneghan, Anne-Marie Boylan

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Oghenekome A GbinigieNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford.ORCID 0000-0002-2963-4491
Sarah Tonkin-CrineNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford; National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit in Healthcare Associated Infections and Antimicrobial Resistance, University of Oxford, Oxford.ORCID 0000-0003-4470-1151
Christoper C ButlerNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford.ORCID 0000-0002-0102-3453
Carl J HeneghanNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford.ORCID 0000-0002-1009-1992
Anne-Marie BoylanNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford.ORCID 0000-0001-8187-0742
University of Oxford · GBNational Institute for Health Research · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe views of women with acute, uncomplicated urinary tract infection (auUTI) on the acceptability of non-antibiotic treatment options are poorly understood.

aimTo establish women's thoughts on and experience of non-antibiotic treatment for auUTIs. DESIGN AND

settingQualitative interview study with primary care patients in Oxfordshire, UK, embedded within the Cranberry for Urinary Tract Infection (CUTI) feasibility trial.

methodOne-to-one, semi-structured interviews were conducted between August 2019 and January 2020 with some CUTI trial participants and some patients who were not part of the CUTI trial who had experienced at least one urinary tract infection (UTI) in the preceding 12 months in Oxfordshire, UK. Interviews were analysed using thematic analysis.

resultsIn total, 26 interviews were conducted and analysed. Women expected to receive an immediate antibiotic for their UTI but were aware of the potential harms of this approach. They were keen to find a non-antibiotic, 'natural' alternative that could effectively manage their symptoms. In certain situations (early illness, milder illness, and with no important upcoming engagements), women indicated they would be prepared to postpone antibiotic treatment by up to 3 days, especially if offered an interim non-antibiotic option with perceived therapeutic potential.

conclusionMany women with auUTIs are open to trying non-antibiotic treatments first in certain situations. There is scope for more dialogue between primary care clinicians and patients with auUTI around delaying antibiotic treatment and using non-antibiotic options initially, which could reduce antibiotic consumption for this common infection.

Indexed as

Urinary Tract InfectionsAnti-Bacterial AgentsFemaleHumansPrimary Health CareQualitative ResearchAnti-Bacterial Agentsdelayed antibioticsgeneral practiceprimary health carequalitative researchurinary tract infectionsvaccinium macrocarpon

Identifiers

PMID35314431
PMCPMC8966781
OpenAlexW4220877917

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.