ArticleInternational journal of general medicine2024
Perceived Knowledge, Guidelines Concordance, and Practices of Physicians for Management of Recurrent Urinary Tract Infections in Women.
Article in International journal of general medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Recurrent urinary tract infections (rUTIs) are common complaints that burden the healthcare system. Reporting perceived knowledge and guidelines in concordance regarding the management of (rUTI) is essential for providing better healthcare and higher treatment rate. This study assesses the perceived knowledge, guidelines concordance, and physicians' practices toward treatment of (rUTI) among physicians with different specialties. Study Design: This questionnaire-based survey included residents, fellows, and consultants of various specialties across several regions in Saudi Arabia. Results: A total of 419 physicians were included in the final analysis. In terms of age distribution, the majority were 28-38 years of age (159, 37.9%), followed by 18-28 years (99, 23.6%). Gender distribution was nearly balanced. The sample included a significant number of residents (182, 43.4%), consultants (173, 41.3%), and fellows (64, 15.3%). OBS/GYNE shows a significant presence of females (40.6%) and is notably represented in private hospitals or clinics (52.5%) and among fellows (40.6%) and consultants (32.4%). Infectious disease physicians had the highest perceived knowledge scores (3.83 ± 0.09), followed closely by urologists/urogynecologists (3.67 ± 0.48). Urologists/urogynecologists also reported the highest satisfaction (4.24 ± 0.83) and familiarity (2.89 ± 1.11) with new rUTI guidelines. Infectious disease physicians were most confident (3.50 ± 0.71) in communicating with patients about rUTI treatment options. In terms of practices and guideline adherence, obstetricians/gynaecologists were more likely to repeat urine sample tests for suspected contamination (3.73 ± 1.00) and less likely to treat asymptomatic bacteriuria (1.33 ± 0.59) the same as UTIs compared to other physicians. They also scored highest in conducting post-treatment tests for asymptomatic patients (3.21 ± 1.37) and recommending vaginal estrogen therapy for peri- and post-menopausal women to prevent UTIs (3.59 ± 1.06) among all specialties. Conversely, urologists and urogynecologists were more likely to discuss antibiotic prophylaxis (3.79 ± 0.89) and cranberry prophylaxis (3.71 ± 0.73) with their rUTI patients. Conclusion: The findings highlight variations in knowledge, satisfaction, familiarity with guidelines, confidence in communication, and guideline concordance among different physician specialities regarding the management of UTIs and rUTIs.
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.