ArticleAntimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE2026
Antimicrobial stewardship at a tertiary center in Portugal: insights from prescribers.
Article in Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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.
- Erratum: Antimicrobial stewardship at a tertiary center in Portugal: insights from prescribers - ERRATUM.Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate physician engagement with an antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP) at a tertiary hospital and identify areas for improvement in the delivery of stewardship interventions. Design: Cross-sectional survey study. Setting: A 1200-bed tertiary care public hospital in Portugal. Participants: Physicians with antibiotic prescribing privileges in inpatient settings. All physicians with active institutional e-mail addresses were invited to participate. Methods: An anonymous web-based questionnaire was administered between June and December 2024. The survey addressed six domains: (1) antibiotic knowledge; (2) awareness and use of local prescribing protocols; (3) access to antimicrobial use and resistance reports; (4) awareness of antibiotic restriction policies; (5) use of informal consultations with the stewardship team; and (6) participation in scheduled multidisciplinary case discussions. Results: A total of 154 prescribing physicians responded (response rate: 10%), including specialists (75.3%) and residents (24.0%). Most respondents were aware of institutional protocols (78.6%), but 66.9% reported rarely or never consulting them, citing accessibility and reliance on personal knowledge as key barriers. Participation in case discussions was limited (25.3%) but viewed as highly useful. Awareness of restrictive antibiotic policies was low; however, 69.5% indicated that these policies influenced their prescribing behavior. Respondents expressed strong interest in regular feedback on antimicrobial use and resistance trends. Conclusions: Key areas for improvement in ASP implementation include enhancing access to protocols, expanding case-based discussions, clarifying communication around restrictions, and establishing regular feedback mechanisms. These findings may inform efforts to align ASP strategies with clinical realities in similar hospital settings.
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.