初级保健实践中 CRP 护理点检测的使用情况和后果:一项针对德国 1,740 例患者的真实世界多中心观察研究。

IF 2.5 Q2 PRIMARY HEALTH CARE
BJGP Open Pub Date : 2024-08-19 DOI:10.3399/BJGPO.2024.0120
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":"初级保健实践中 CRP 护理点检测的使用情况和后果:一项针对德国 1,740 例患者的真实世界多中心观察研究。","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":"{\"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}","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

摘要

背景:C反应蛋白的床旁检测(POCT)可为全科医生(GP)的临床决策提供支持,但在德国的全科诊所中并未得到广泛应用。目的:调查半定量CRP-POCT在常规初级保健中的使用情况:德国 49 家全科诊所的前瞻性观察研究(2022 年 11 月至 2023 年 4 月):向全科医生提供 CRP-POCT,并使用标准化数据收集表收集每次使用 CRP-POCT 的数据:结果:记录了 1,740 次使用 CRP-POCT 的数据。全科医生主要对呼吸道感染(RTI,占所有病例的 70.9%)患者使用 CRP-POCT,其次是胃肠道感染(GI,占 10.3%)患者。在呼吸道感染病例中,CRP-POCT 常用于区分细菌和病毒病因(60.8%),并指导抗生素处方决策(62.8%)。在消化道疾病中,CRP-POCT 主要用于排除严重的疾病进展(53.2%)和决定进一步的诊断程序(45.6%)。在 RTI 病例中,CRP-POCT 对 77.5% 的抗生素处方产生了影响(32.3% 赞成,45.2% 弃权)。在消化道疾病中,CRP 水平主要影响进一步诊断程序的决定。全科医生报告说,CRP-POCT 对 88.6% 的病例有帮助:结论:在有条件的情况下,德国全科医生主要使用半定量 CRP-POCT 来指导 RTI 患者的抗生素处方决策。CRP-POCT 的使用改善了临床决策,增强了全科医生的临床信心。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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.

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.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
BJGP Open
BJGP Open Medicine-Family Practice
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
181
审稿时长
22 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信