ArticleGMS hygiene and infection control2023
Attitudes of primary care physicians towards antimicrobial stewardship and the impact of a multi-part training course - a pilot study.
Article in GMS hygiene and infection control, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
- Stewards for future: Piloting a medical undergraduate elective on antimicrobial stewardship.GMS journal for medical education · 2025Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: A plethora of antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) programs has been initiated during the past years, focusing on hospital settings. Primary-care physicians have seldom been addressed, although the majority of antibiotic prescriptions are issued for outpatients. We sought to investigate attitudes of primary-care physicians and the impact of a customized training course. Methods: Primary-care physicians in southwest Germany were invited to a multi-part training course on AMS in the primary-care setting. Participants were asked to answer a questionnaire about their attitude and factors that hinder them from implementing AMS or enable them to perform AMS. In addition, a knowledge assessment exam at the beginning and end of the training was conducted on selected infectious diseases/syndromes. Results: In total, 36 primary-care physicians participated in the training course. The predominant age group was 51-60 years old (36%; 13/36). The majority, 23/35 (66%), indicated never having had AMS training, while 22/35 (63%) acknowledged partly implementing AMS activities in their daily routine. The primary barrier was lack of expertise, while the main motives were reducing antimicrobial resistance and optimizing patient care. The provision of guidelines was regarded as more important than feedback on their prescription behavior. Exam performance improved from the initial to the final exam on all topics. Conclusion: Customized AMS training courses are a feasible and potentially complimentary tool to address antibiotic misuse in the primary-care setting.
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.