Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41497434›Full record

ArticleAntimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE2026

Antimicrobial stewardship at a tertiary center in Portugal: insights from prescribers.

André Valois, Mariana Salvado de Morais, Lúcia Ribeiro Dias, Francisco Almeida, Mariana Guedes, Paulo Andrade, Nuno Rocha-Pereira

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

André ValoisDepartment of Biomedicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0000-2011-3596
Mariana Salvado de MoraisInternal Medicine Department, São José Local Health Unit (ULS de São José), Lisbon, Portugal.
Lúcia Ribeiro DiasDepartment of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8548-6393
Francisco AlmeidaInfectious Diseases Department, São João Local Health Unit (ULS São João), Porto, Portugal.
Mariana GuedesInfectious Diseases Department, São João Local Health Unit (ULS São João), Porto, Portugal.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0681-3091
Paulo AndradeInfection and Antimicrobial Resistance Control and Prevention Unit, Hospital Epidemiology Centre, São João Local Health Unit (ULS São João), Porto, Portugal.
Nuno Rocha-PereiraDepartment of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3512-0777

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

PMID41497434
PMCPMC12766505

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.