Cited by 101Antibiotic Use and ResistanceSurgical site infection preventionInfection Control in Healthcare

Understanding antibiotic decision making in surgery—a qualitative analysis

Open access
Charani, E., Tarrant, C., Moorthy, K., Sevdalis, N., Brennan, L., Holmes, A.H.·2017·Clinical Microbiology and Infection

Abstract

Objective To investigate the characteristics and culture of antibiotic decision making in the surgical specialty.Methods A qualitative study including ethnographic observation and face-to-face interviews with participants from six surgical teams at a teaching hospital in London was conducted. Over a 3-month period: (a) 30 ward rounds (WRs) (100 h) were observed, (b) face-to-face follow-up interviews took place with 13 key informants, (c) multidisciplinary meetings on the management of surgical patients and daily practice on wards were observed. Applying these methods provided rich data for characterizing the antibiotic decision making in surgery and enabled cross-validation and triangulation of the findings. Data from the interview transcripts and the observational notes were coded and analysed iteratively until saturation was reached.Results The surgical team is in a state of constant flux with individuals having to adjust to the context in which they work. The demands placed on the team to be in the operating room, and to address the surgical needs of the patient mean that the responsibility for antibiotic decision making is uncoordinated and diffuse. Antibiotic decision making is considered by surgeons as a secondary task, commonly delegated to junior members of their team and occurs in the context of disjointed communication.Conclusion There is lack of clarity around medical decision making for treating infections in surgical patients. The result is sub-optimal and uncoordinated antimicrobial management. Developing the role of a perioperative clinician may help to improve patient-level outcomes and optimize decision making.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cmi.2017.03.013

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • There have been studies with similar findings regarding the influence of the attitudes and leadership style of the surgical team on antibiotic decision-making.

    “There have been studies with similar findings regarding the influence of the attitudes and leadership style of the surgical team on antibiotic decision-making.26”

    From Rationalizing irrational prescribing—infection-related attitudes and practices across paediatric surgery specialties in a hospital in South India (2024) · cites this paper as [26]

    The ‘Delegating antibiotic management’ section reports that surgeons treat antibiotic decisions as secondary and often delegate them; the discussion also links fear of infection and blame to prescribing decisions. These passages support an influence of surgical-team attitudes and responsibility, but the paper does not examine leadership style specifically. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 32 · Cited by 101

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Teillant A, Gandra S, Barter D, Morgan DJ, Laxminarayan R. Potential burden of antibiotic resistance on surgery and cancer chemotherapy antibiotic pro- phylaxis in the USA. Lancet Infect Dis 2015;15:1429e37.
  2. Anthes E. The trouble with Checklists. Nature 2015;523:516e8.

Authors
Charani, E., Tarrant, C., Moorthy, K., Sevdalis, N., Brennan, L., & Holmes, A. H.
Affiliations
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research (GB)
  • University of Leicester (GB)
  • Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust (GB)
  • King's College London (GB)
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
Corresponding author
Charani, E.
Venue
Clinical Microbiology and Infection
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-10
Volume
23
Issue
10
Pages
752-760
ISSN
1198-743X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2601985159
Cited by
101
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 5
FWCI
7.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Clinical Microbiology and Infection (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Leicester Research Archive (University of Leicester) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Spiral (Imperial College London) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
  • National Institute for Health Research
  • Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust
  • King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust
  • King's College London
  • South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust
  • Guy's and St Thomas' Charity
  • the Maudsley Charity
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology › Antibiotic Use and Resistance
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Surgical site infection prevention
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Infection Control in Healthcare
Keywords
antibiotic decision-making, surgical infections, antimicrobial stewardship, surgical team, ward rounds, task delegation, communication breakdown, multidisciplinary team meetings
MeSH terms
Antimicrobial Stewardship, Adult, Anti-Bacterial Agents, Decision Making, Hospitals, Teaching, Humans, Interviews as Topic, London, Surgical Wound Infection, Antibiotic Prophylaxis, Surgeons

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review