ArticleBMC primary care2022
Adherence to and usefulness of the national treatment guideline for urinary tract infections (UTI) in a risk area.
Article in BMC primary care, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- General practitioners' perspectives on diagnosis and treatment of uncomplicated urinary tract infections: A qualitative study in the Northern Dutch-German cross-border region.The European journal of general practice · 2025Article
- Adherence to Antibiotic Prescription Guidelines in Four Community Hospitals in Germany.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- GPs' Perspective on a Multimodal Intervention to Enhance Guideline-Adherence in Uncomplicated Urinary Tract Infections: A Qualitative Process Evaluation of the Multicentric RedAres Cluster-Randomised Controlled Trial.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Young Women's Attitudes and Behaviors in Treatment and Prevention of UTIs: Are Biomedical Students at an Advantage?Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo optimize antibiotic treatment and decrease antibiotic resistance, national treatment guidelines are available for urinary tract infections (UTIs) in general practice. The usefulness of these guidelines in risk areas for antimicrobial resistance such as cross border regions or areas with dense agriculture, is unknown.
methodsMidstream urine samples from women with symptoms of acute UTI visiting general practitioners (GPs) in the Westland area, a dense agriculture area, were microbiologically analysed, and patient characteristics, symptoms, previous and present antibiotic treatment were collected. The National Nivel data were used as reference for antibiotic resistance.
resultsOf 310 women with symptoms of uncomplicated UTI, 247 (80%) had a culture proven E. coli UTI. Empirical antibiotic therapy was prescribed to 148 patients (48%) in total; in 7% of women with a negative and 52% with a positive urine culture. Having more than one symptom was associated with the prescription of antibiotics; travel history or previous antibiotic use for UTI were not. The isolated uropathogens were susceptible to the empiric antibiotic therapy in 98% of patients. Resistance to co-amoxiclav was higher (22%) than reported in the national data of 2004 (12%), 2009 (13%) and 2014 (9%), as was the prevalence of extended spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL): 3.4% in our study versus 0.1%, 1% and 2.2% in the national data respectively.
conclusionThe presence of environmental and socio-demographic risk factors for antibiotic resistance did not influence the empiric choice nor susceptibility for antibiotics advised by the national guidelines in women with uncomplicated UTI.
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.