Utilization and consequences of CRP point-of-care-testing in primary care practices: a real-world multicentre observational study with 1,740 patient cases in Germany.
Robby Markwart, Lena-Sophie Lehmann, Markus Krause, Paul Jung, Liliana Rost, Susanne Doepfmer, Lisa Kuempel, Doreen Kuschick, Kahina J Toutaoui, Christoph Heintze, Jutta Bleidorn, Florian Wolf
{"title":"Utilization and consequences of CRP point-of-care-testing in primary care practices: a real-world multicentre observational study with 1,740 patient cases in Germany.","authors":"Robby Markwart, Lena-Sophie Lehmann, Markus Krause, Paul Jung, Liliana Rost, Susanne Doepfmer, Lisa Kuempel, Doreen Kuschick, Kahina J Toutaoui, Christoph Heintze, Jutta Bleidorn, Florian Wolf","doi":"10.3399/BJGPO.2024.0120","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Point-of-care tests (POCTs) for C-reactive protein can support clinical decision-making of general practitioners (GPs) but are not widely used in German general practices.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To investigate the utilization of semi-quantitative CRP-POCTs in routine primary care.</p><p><strong>Design & setting: </strong>Prospective observational study in 49 general practices in Germany (Nov/2022 to Apr/2023).</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>GPs were provided with CRP-POCTs and collected data for each CRP-POCT use using standardized data collection sheets.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Data from 1,740 CRP-POCT uses were recorded. GPs employed CRP-POCTs mainly for patients with respiratory tract infections (RTIs, 70.9% of all cases) and to a lesser extent for gastrointestinal infections (GIs, 10.3%). In RTIs, CRP-POCTs were frequently used to distinguish between bacterial and viral aetiology (60.8%) and to guide decisions on antibiotic prescribing (62.8%). In GIs, CRP-POCTs were mainly used to rule out severe disease progressions (53.2%) and for decisions on further diagnostic procedures (45.6%). In RTIs, CRP-POCTs influenced antibiotic prescribing in 77.5 % of the cases (32.3% in favour <i>vs</i>. 45.2% waiver). In GIs, CRP levels mainly affected decisions on further diagnostic procedures. GPs reported that CRP-POCTs were helpful in 88.6% of all cases.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>When available, German GPs predominantly use semi-quantitative CRP-POCTs to guide decisions on antibiotic prescribing in patients with RTI. CRP-POCT use improves clinical decision-making and increases the GPs' clinical confidence.</p>","PeriodicalId":36541,"journal":{"name":"BJGP Open","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BJGP Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3399/BJGPO.2024.0120","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PRIMARY HEALTH CARE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Point-of-care tests (POCTs) for C-reactive protein can support clinical decision-making of general practitioners (GPs) but are not widely used in German general practices.
Aim: To investigate the utilization of semi-quantitative CRP-POCTs in routine primary care.
Design & setting: Prospective observational study in 49 general practices in Germany (Nov/2022 to Apr/2023).
Method: GPs were provided with CRP-POCTs and collected data for each CRP-POCT use using standardized data collection sheets.
Results: Data from 1,740 CRP-POCT uses were recorded. GPs employed CRP-POCTs mainly for patients with respiratory tract infections (RTIs, 70.9% of all cases) and to a lesser extent for gastrointestinal infections (GIs, 10.3%). In RTIs, CRP-POCTs were frequently used to distinguish between bacterial and viral aetiology (60.8%) and to guide decisions on antibiotic prescribing (62.8%). In GIs, CRP-POCTs were mainly used to rule out severe disease progressions (53.2%) and for decisions on further diagnostic procedures (45.6%). In RTIs, CRP-POCTs influenced antibiotic prescribing in 77.5 % of the cases (32.3% in favour vs. 45.2% waiver). In GIs, CRP levels mainly affected decisions on further diagnostic procedures. GPs reported that CRP-POCTs were helpful in 88.6% of all cases.
Conclusions: When available, German GPs predominantly use semi-quantitative CRP-POCTs to guide decisions on antibiotic prescribing in patients with RTI. CRP-POCT use improves clinical decision-making and increases the GPs' clinical confidence.