ArticleJAC-antimicrobial resistance2026
From adoption to implementation: paediatricians' experiences with C-reactive protein point-of-care testing in the community setting.
Article in JAC-antimicrobial resistance, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The ARON trial demonstrated the (cost-)effectiveness of a multifaceted antimicrobial stewardship intervention including C-reactive protein (CRP) point-of-care testing (POCT) for children with acute illness in Belgian general practice and community-based paediatrics. However, little is known about how CRP POCT is experienced in paediatric practice in the community, particularly in the absence of structural support and a formal legal framework. The objective of the study was to explore how paediatricians use, interpret, and adapt CRP POCT in real-world community-based practice and to identify factors influencing its sustained implementation. Methods: We conducted semi-structured interviews with Belgian paediatricians experienced in using CRP POCT, either through participation in the ARON trial or as part of routine care, allowing us to capture both protocol-guided and routine practice implementation experiences. Participants were recruited using a mixed sampling approach, combining convenience and snowball sampling. Data were analysed thematically, guided by two complementary implementation science frameworks: the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and Normalization Process Theory. Results: Fifteen paediatricians were interviewed. Participants generally viewed CRP POCT positively, but reported navigating substantial implementation challenges, including the absence of reimbursement and unclear logistical routes. Use frequently extended beyond its intended diagnostic purpose, with CRP POCT employed to support communication with parents, provide reassurance or legitimise treatment decisions. Interpretation and confidence evolved through repeated use and informal peer exchange. In the absence of formal feedback or training, clinicians relied primarily on experiential learning to refine their practice. Conclusions: These findings illustrate both the flexibility and fragility of self-directed implementation in the absence of system-level support. While paediatricians valued CRP POCT, translating early adoption into sustained and equitable routine use in community paediatric care will require formal guidance, financing structures, and shared interpretative frameworks.
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.