Cited by 49Antibiotic Use and ResistanceHealthcare cost, quality, practicesHealth Policy Implementation Science

GPs' views in five European countries of interventions to promote prudent antibiotic use

Open access
Tonkin-Crine, Sarah, Yardley, Lucy, Coenen, Samuel, Fernandez-Vandellos, Patricia, Krawczyk, Jaroslaw, Touboul, Pia, Verheij, Theo, Little, Paul·2011·British Journal of General Practice

Abstract

BACKGROUND: A variety of interventions have been developed to promote a more prudent use of antibiotics by implementing clinical guidelines. It is not yet clear which are most acceptable and feasible for implementation across a wide range of contexts. Previous research has been confined mainly to examining views of individual interventions in a national context. AIM: To explore GPs' views and experiences of strategies to promote a more prudent use of antibiotics, across five countries. DESIGN AND SETTING: Qualitative study using thematic and framework analysis in general practices in Belgium, France, Poland, Spain, and the UK. METHOD: Fifty-two semi-structured interviews explored GPs' views and experiences of strategies aimed at promoting a more prudent use of antibiotics. Interviews were carried out in person or over the telephone, transcribed verbatim, and translated into English where necessary for analysis. RESULTS: Themes were remarkably consistent across the countries. GPs had a preference for interventions that allowed discussion and comparison with local colleagues, which helped them to identify how their practice could improve. Other popular components of interventions included the use of near-patient tests to reduce diagnostic uncertainty, and the involvement of other health professionals to increase their responsibility for prescribing. CONCLUSION: The study findings could be used to inform future interventions to improve their acceptability to GPs. Consistency in views across countries indicates the potential for development of an intervention that could be implemented on a European scale.

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 · 10.3399/bjgp11x572445

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 33 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tonkin-Crine, S., Yardley, L., Coenen, S., Fernandez-Vandellos, P., Krawczyk, J., Touboul, P., Verheij, T., & Little, P.
Affiliations
  • University of Southampton (GB)
  • University of Antwerp (BE)
Venue
British Journal of General Practice
Published
2011-05
Volume
61
Issue
586
Pages
e252-e261
ISSN
  • 0960-1643 (ISSN-L)
  • 1478-5242
OpenAlex
W2128535697
Cited by
49
References
33
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 5
FWCI
5.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • British Journal of General Practice (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ePrints Soton (University of Southampton) (submittedVersion)
Funders
European Commission
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology › Antibiotic Use and Resistance
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Healthcare cost, quality, practices
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
Keywords
rational antibiotic use, antibiotic prescribing, clinical guidelines implementation, treatment acceptability, diagnostic uncertainty, cross-national comparison, general practice
MeSH terms
Acute Disease, Adult, Anti-Bacterial Agents, Attitude of Health Personnel, Europe, Feasibility Studies, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Practice Patterns, Physicians', Drug Prescriptions, Respiratory Tract Infections, Practice Guidelines as Topic, Qualitative Research, General Practice

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