ReviewAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Implementation of C-Reactive Protein Point-of-Care Testing for Respiratory Tract Infections in Primary Care: A Systematic Review Using the RE-AIM Framework.
Review in Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland), 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
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesC-reactive protein point-of-care tests (CRP POCTs) have become a useful tool in reducing inappropriate prescribing of antibiotics in the management of respiratory tract infections (RTIs). This review examined the barriers and enablers of CRP POCT implementation in primary care using the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework.
methodsA search was conducted in six electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL (EBSCOhost), Medline (EBSCOhost), ProQuest and CENTRAL) for studies up to December 2025 on CRP POCT implementation for RTIs in primary care. Eligible studies included quantitative randomised controlled trials (RCTs), qualitative studies, cost-effectiveness studies, mixed-methods and observational studies. Only English-language studies were included.
resultsThe review included 35 studies. CRP POCT was generally found to be an effective and acceptable tool due to reductions in antibiotic prescribing, playing a role in supporting clinical decision-making and patient communication. However, widespread adoption and usage were inconsistent across studies. Further, qualitative findings raised operational and financial constraints as key barriers to sustained implementation. Reporting of RE-AIM domains varied across study type. Notable gaps were identified in reporting of the maintenance domain along with population representativeness, non-participation, and device uptake. Of the 35 studies, 13 included 'operational' and/or 'financial constraints' as identified themes or concerns about wider implementation.
conclusionsAlthough CRP POCT has routinely been found to be effective, a wider comprehensive assessment of implementation is restricted due to gaps in reporting. Key barriers to sustained and scalable global implementation of CRP POCT in primary care are predominantly financial and operational.
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.