ArticleArchives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique2026
Evaluation of the implementation process of POC-CRP devices in managing adults with cough in general practice: insights from a focus group study.
Article in Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAlthough acute respiratory tract infections are typically self-limiting, general practitioners (GPs) frequently prescribe antibiotics. C-reactive protein (CRP) point-of-care testing (POCT) has been shown to significantly reduce antibiotic prescribing and is cost-effective for adults with acute cough. However, before nationwide implementation in Belgium, organizational barriers must be addressed.
aimto explore GPs’ experiences in a pilot project, using POC-CRP devices in general practice for adults with acute cough.
methodsFollowing a national CRP POCT pilot study, four multidisciplinary, semi-structured focus groups were conducted with 32 Belgian GPs and relevant stakeholders, whose role was limited to offering technical clarification when needed. Transcripts were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis.
resultsAcross four focus groups, we identified four overarching themes. i. Reduced diagnostic uncertainty: CRP POCT is used as an objective tool to guide clinical decisions in cases of diagnostic uncertainty and to manage patient expectations. Doctors highlighted its usefulness across various conditions, especially in children. ii. Seamless integration with reliable support: The test was well integrated into routines, with GPs multitasking during the short waiting time. The device’s speed, simplicity, and small blood sample volume were crucial. GPs stressed the need for robust quality control and manufacturer support. iii. Facilitated decision making and patient communication: CRP POCT, used in addition to clinical judgment, supported clinical decisions, seemed to reduce unnecessary antibiotics, and reassured both doctors and patients. It also encouraged peer consultations when results were unclear. iv. Financial and reimbursement concerns: High test costs and lack of reimbursement remain key barriers to wider adoption.
conclusionsFindings suggest that the tailored implementation of CRP POCT in Belgium can be effective if key aspects such as ease of use, seamless workflow integration, and decision-making support are prioritized. This approach aims to reduce inappropriate antibiotic prescribing and support antimicrobial stewardship efforts.
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.