Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39907301›Full record

ArticleAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy2025

Guidelines vs mindlines: a qualitative investigation of how clinicians' beliefs influence the application of rapid molecular diagnostics in intensive care.

Sarah-Jane F Stewart, Alyssa M Pandolfo, Yogini Jani, Zoe Moon, David Brealey, Virve I Enne, David M Livermore, Vanya Gant, Stephen J Brett, Rob Horne and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Review
  10. 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

11 authors.

Sarah-Jane F Stewart *School of Pharmacy, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-2396-9028
Alyssa M Pandolfo *School of Pharmacy, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-0455-496X
Yogini JaniSchool of Pharmacy, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Zoe MoonSchool of Pharmacy, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
David BrealeyDivision of Critical Care, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom.
Virve I EnneDivision of Infection and Immunity, University College London Faculty of Medical Sciences, London, United Kingdom.
David M LivermoreNorwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, United Kingdom.
Vanya GantDepartment of Medical Microbiology, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom.
Stephen J BrettDepartment of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Rob HorneSchool of Pharmacy, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-3068-8438
INHALE WP4 Study Group

Funding

National Institute for Health Research RP-PG-0514-20018
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Rapid molecular diagnostic tests improve antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) by facilitating earlier refinement of antimicrobial therapy. The INHALE trial tested the application of the BioFire FilmArray Pneumonia Panel (Pneumonia Panel) for antibiotic prescribing for hospital-acquired and ventilator-associated pneumonias (HAP/VAP) in UK intensive care units (ICUs). We report a behavioral study embedded within the INHALE trial examining clinicians' perceptions of using these tests. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 20 ICU clinicians after using the Pneumonia Panel to manage suspected HAP/VAP. Thematic analysis identified factors reinforcing perceptions of the necessity to modify antibiotic prescribing in accordance with test results and doubts/concerns about doing so. While most acknowledged the importance of AMS, the test's impact on prescribing decisions was limited. Concerns about potential consequences of undertreatment to the patient and prescriber were often more salient than AMS, sometimes leading to "just-in-case" antibiotic prescriptions. Test results indicating a broad-spectrum antibiotic were unnecessary often failed to influence clinicians to avoid an initial prescription or de-escalate antibiotics early as they considered their use to be necessary to protect the patient and themselves, "erring on the side of caution." Some clinicians described cases where antibiotics would be prescribed for a sick patient regardless of test results because, in their opinion, it fits with the clinical picture-"treating the patient, not the result." Our findings illustrate a tension between prescribing guidelines and clinicians' "mindlines," characterized by previous experiences. This highlights the need for a "technology plus" approach, recognizing the challenges clinicians face when applying technological solutions to patient care.IMPORTANCERapid molecular diagnostic tests for pathogens and resistance genes may improve antibiotic-prescribing decisions and stewardship. However, clinicians' desire to protect their patients with antibiotics often overrides more distal concerns about possible resistance selection, limiting the application of these tests in practice. Findings underscore the challenge of changing prescribing decisions based on technical results or guidelines, highlighting factors such as clinicians' previous experience and "knowledge in practice" as more proximal drivers of these decisions. Implementation strategies for technological solutions to antimicrobial resistance must be "behaviorally intelligent," recognizing the challenges facing clinicians when making "life or death" prescribing decisions.CLINICAL TRIALSThis study is registered with ISRCTN as ISRCTN16483855.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsMolecular Diagnostic TechniquesPneumonia, Ventilator-AssociatedAntimicrobial StewardshipCritical CareFemaleHumansIntensive Care UnitsMalePractice Patterns, Physicians'Anti-Bacterial Agentsantibiotic prescribingintensive carepneumoniarapid molecular diagnostics

Identifiers

PMID39907301
PMCPMC11881570

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.