ArticlePilot and feasibility studies2025
Optimal Implementation of Antimicrobial Stewardship in General Practice: protocol for a feasibility study and evaluation of a digital AMS Toolbox.
Article in Pilot and feasibility studies, 2025. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAntimicrobial resistance is a worldwide problem caused by the inappropriate use of antibiotics. In Australia, antibiotics are frequently prescribed in general practice (primary care) settings for acute respiratory infections (ARIs) despite these infections most commonly being caused by viruses. The Optimal Implementation of Antimicrobial Stewardship in General Practice (OptimasGP) study aims to provide implementation support for effective antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) interventions for ARIs. The current study will examine if a redesigned workflow, and an AMS Toolbox containing AMS resources, is an acceptable way to access AMS interventions and clinical data collected in general practice settings.
methodsA mixed-methods approach will be applied using a single-arm, pragmatic exploratory study. Data will be collected for a period of 3 months. Data collection from general practice settings in New South Wales, Australia, will involve the participation of 4 to 6 practices, 12 general practitioners (GPs), and 6 to 8 practice staff. We also aim to recruit 50-100 patients to complete surveys and 12 patients to participate in focus group discussions. Participating GPs and practice staff will be provided with an online AMS Toolbox to facilitate access to AMS resources. Two hours of online training and a reminder card will also be provided. The AMS Toolbox will contain AMS resources for shared decision-making, clinical decision support (including point-of-care testing), and delayed antibiotic prescribing in patients with ARIs. The primary outcome of the study will be the acceptability of the AMS Toolbox to GPs, practice staff, and patients. Secondary outcomes will include recruitment and completion rates, qualitative findings from the focus group discussions, resource use and antibiotic prescription rates, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), and patient-reported experience measures (PREMS). DISCUSSION: AMS interventions are needed to help reduce inappropriate antibiotic prescribing for ARIs in general practice settings. The findings of this study will inform a hybrid type 3 implementation trial.
trial registrationRegistered prospectively with the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry (ACTRN12624001011572) on 20 August 2024.
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.