Thomas Victor Christensen, Malene Plejdrup Hansen, Morten Sig Ager Jensen, Camilla Hoffmann Merrild
{"title":"The decision-making process in general practice of when to use antibiotics to treat acute rhinosinusitis.","authors":"Thomas Victor Christensen, Malene Plejdrup Hansen, Morten Sig Ager Jensen, Camilla Hoffmann Merrild","doi":"10.1080/02813432.2025.2568043","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The Danish primary care sector is responsible for the majority of antibiotic prescriptions, with upper respiratory tract infections, particularly acute rhinosinusitis (ARS), being a key contributor. This study explored the decision-making process regarding antibiotic use for ARS among general practitioners (GPs) and doctors in training working in general practice.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Nine semi-structured interviews were conducted with 10 doctors. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analyzed using systematic text condensation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Four key themes were developed: (1) 'It all starts before the consultation': staff-led triage shaping ARS care, (2) two diagnostic worlds: experienced intuition vs. rule-bound caution, (3) C-reactive protein (CRP) in the crossfire: guide, reassurance or irrelevant in antibiotic decision-making and (4) 'Sometimes it's a negotiation': managing patient expectations without losing stewardship. Although diagnosing ARS was often straightforward, distinguishing bacterial from viral infections proved difficult. C-reactive protein testing was common, but its reliability was questioned. Antibiotic prescribing decisions were influenced by patient history, comorbidities and risk factors. While antibiotics were rarely considered necessary initially, patient expectations and doctor-patient relationships sometimes influenced prescribing.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study illustrates the complexity of diagnosing and managing ARS, shaped by clinical uncertainty, competing priorities and non-clinical pressures. Variation in doctor involvement, diagnostic practices and CRP thresholds reveals the challenges of standardization. Training, guidelines and patient education are valued but may not ensure optimal antibiotic use. Diagnostic decisions are relational, negotiated and context-specific, influenced by public health concerns, patient needs and workflow demands. Without acknowledging this complexity, antibiotic stewardship efforts could potentially fall short.</p>","PeriodicalId":21521,"journal":{"name":"Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care","volume":" ","pages":"1-14"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02813432.2025.2568043","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: The Danish primary care sector is responsible for the majority of antibiotic prescriptions, with upper respiratory tract infections, particularly acute rhinosinusitis (ARS), being a key contributor. This study explored the decision-making process regarding antibiotic use for ARS among general practitioners (GPs) and doctors in training working in general practice.
Methods: Nine semi-structured interviews were conducted with 10 doctors. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analyzed using systematic text condensation.
Results: Four key themes were developed: (1) 'It all starts before the consultation': staff-led triage shaping ARS care, (2) two diagnostic worlds: experienced intuition vs. rule-bound caution, (3) C-reactive protein (CRP) in the crossfire: guide, reassurance or irrelevant in antibiotic decision-making and (4) 'Sometimes it's a negotiation': managing patient expectations without losing stewardship. Although diagnosing ARS was often straightforward, distinguishing bacterial from viral infections proved difficult. C-reactive protein testing was common, but its reliability was questioned. Antibiotic prescribing decisions were influenced by patient history, comorbidities and risk factors. While antibiotics were rarely considered necessary initially, patient expectations and doctor-patient relationships sometimes influenced prescribing.
Conclusions: This study illustrates the complexity of diagnosing and managing ARS, shaped by clinical uncertainty, competing priorities and non-clinical pressures. Variation in doctor involvement, diagnostic practices and CRP thresholds reveals the challenges of standardization. Training, guidelines and patient education are valued but may not ensure optimal antibiotic use. Diagnostic decisions are relational, negotiated and context-specific, influenced by public health concerns, patient needs and workflow demands. Without acknowledging this complexity, antibiotic stewardship efforts could potentially fall short.
期刊介绍:
Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care is an international online open access journal publishing articles with relevance to general practice and primary health care. Focusing on the continuous professional development in family medicine the journal addresses clinical, epidemiological and humanistic topics in relation to the daily clinical practice.
Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care is owned by the members of the National Colleges of General Practice in the five Nordic countries through the Nordic Federation of General Practice (NFGP). The journal includes original research on topics related to general practice and family medicine, and publishes both quantitative and qualitative original research, editorials, discussion and analysis papers and reviews to facilitate continuing professional development in family medicine. The journal''s topics range broadly and include:
• Clinical family medicine
• Epidemiological research
• Qualitative research
• Health services research.