ArticleBMJ open respiratory research2025
Procalcitonin-guided antibiotic prescription in patients with respiratory syncytial virus and influenza virus.
Article in BMJ open respiratory research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBacterial co-infections may occur in patients with influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), often leading to high unnecessary antibiotic exposure. Procalcitonin (PCT) may help reduce inappropriate antibiotic prescriptions in viral infections.
methodsIn this retrospective cohort study, data was analysed from 558 influenza A/B and 175 RSV patients (2017-2024). Patients were divided into PCT (antibiotic prescription guided by PCT levels) and control groups (antibiotic prescription based on clinical judgement). Outcomes included antibiotic use, defined daily dose (DDD), duration of antibiotic treatment (DOT) and secondary outcomes (readmissions, ICU admissions, mortality, mechanical ventilation).
resultsAt admission, 139 (49.6%) of influenza patients in the control group and 148 (53.2%) in the PCT group received antibiotics (adjusted OR 1.20, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.83, p=0.325), indicating no significant difference compared with the control group. For RSV patients, 45 control patients (41.7%) and 33 PCT patients (49.3%) received antibiotics (adjusted OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.44 to 2.14, p=0.490), also showing no significant difference. For influenza, antibiotics were initiated in 175 control patients (62.7%) and 187 PCT patients (67.3%) (adjusted OR 1.25, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.92, p=0.313) during hospitalisation. For RSV, 62 control patients (57.4%) and 58 PCT patients (71.6%) received antibiotics (adjusted OR 1.30, 95% CI 0.60 to 2.89, p=0.498). No significant differences in DOT or DDD were observed for either group. PCT testing showed no significant impact on secondary outcomes.
conclusionIn this retrospective design, PCT testing did not significantly reduce antibiotic use or dosage, suggesting limited utility for optimising antibiotic use in influenza and RSV infections.
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.