BACKGROUND: Most patients with respiratory tract infections (RTIs) are prescribed antibiotics in general practice. However, there is little evidence that antibiotics bring any value to the treatment of most RTIs. Point-of-care C-reactive protein testing may reduce antibiotic prescribing. AIM: To systematically review studies that have examined the association between point-of-care (POC) C-reactive protein testing and antibiotic prescribing for RTIs in general practice. DESIGN AND SETTING: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials and observational studies. METHOD: MEDLINE(®) and Embase were systematically searched to identify relevant publications. All studies that examined the association between POC C-reactive protein testing and antibiotic prescribing for patients with RTIs were included. Two authors independently screened the search results and extracted data from eligible studies. Dichotomous measures of outcomes were combined using risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) either by fixed or random-effect models. RESULTS: Thirteen studies containing 10 005 patients met the inclusion criteria. POC C-reactive protein testing was associated with a significant reduction in antibiotic prescribing at the index consultation (RR 0.75, 95% CI = 0.67 to 0.83), but was not associated with antibiotic prescribing at any time during the 28-day follow-up period (RR 0.85, 95% CI = 0.70 to 1.01) or with patient satisfaction (RR 1.07, 95% CI = 0.98 to 1.17). CONCLUSION: POC C-reactive protein testing significantly reduced antibiotic prescribing at the index consultation for patients with RTIs. Further studies are needed to analyse the confounders that lead to the heterogeneity.
BACKGROUND: Most patients with respiratory tract infections (RTIs) are prescribed antibiotics in general practice. However, there is little evidence that antibiotics bring any value to the treatment of most RTIs. Point-of-care C-reactive protein testing may reduce antibiotic prescribing. AIM: To systematically review studies that have examined the association between point-of-care (POC) C-reactive protein testing and antibiotic prescribing for RTIs in general practice. DESIGN AND SETTING: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials and observational studies. METHOD: MEDLINE(®) and Embase were systematically searched to identify relevant publications. All studies that examined the association between POC C-reactive protein testing and antibiotic prescribing for patients with RTIs were included. Two authors independently screened the search results and extracted data from eligible studies. Dichotomous measures of outcomes were combined using risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) either by fixed or random-effect models. RESULTS: Thirteen studies containing 10 005 patients met the inclusion criteria. POC C-reactive protein testing was associated with a significant reduction in antibiotic prescribing at the index consultation (RR 0.75, 95% CI = 0.67 to 0.83), but was not associated with antibiotic prescribing at any time during the 28-day follow-up period (RR 0.85, 95% CI = 0.70 to 1.01) or with patient satisfaction (RR 1.07, 95% CI = 0.98 to 1.17). CONCLUSION: POC C-reactive protein testing significantly reduced antibiotic prescribing at the index consultation for patients with RTIs. Further studies are needed to analyse the confounders that lead to the heterogeneity.
Authors: Laura Koopman; Geert J M G van der Heijden; Paul P Glasziou; Diederick E Grobbee; Maroeska M Rovers Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2007-08-01 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: Carl Llor; Lars Bjerrum; Javier Arranz; Guillermo García; Josep Maria Cots; Beatriz González López-Valcárcel; María José Monedero; Manuel Gómez; Jesús Ortega; Gloria Guerra; Marina Cid; José Paredes; Vicenta Pineda; Carolina Pérez; Juan de Dios Alcántara; Silvia Hernández Journal: Fam Pract Date: 2012-03-23 Impact factor: 2.267
Authors: Annemiek E Akkerman; Marijke M Kuyvenhoven; Johannes C van der Wouden; Theo J M Verheij Journal: Br J Gen Pract Date: 2005-02 Impact factor: 5.386
Authors: Raymond Oppong; Mark Jit; Richard D Smith; Christopher C Butler; Hasse Melbye; Sigvard Mölstad; Joanna Coast Journal: Br J Gen Pract Date: 2013-07 Impact factor: 5.386
Authors: H Z Diederichsen; M Skamling; A Diederichsen; P Grinsted; S Antonsen; P H Petersen; A P Munck; J Kragstrup Journal: Scand J Prim Health Care Date: 2000-03 Impact factor: 2.581
Authors: Jochen W L Cals; Leon de Bock; Pieter-Jan H W Beckers; Nick A Francis; Rogier M Hopstaken; Kerenza Hood; Eefje G P M de Bont; Christopher C Butler; Geert-Jan Dinant Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2013 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Evi Germeni; Julia Frost; Ruth Garside; Morwenna Rogers; Jose M Valderas; Nicky Britten Journal: Br J Gen Pract Date: 2018-06-18 Impact factor: 5.386
Authors: Malaika Schwartz; Victoria Hardy; Gina A Keppel; William Alto; Jaime Hornecker; Beth Robitaille; Jon Neher; John Holmes; M Ashworth Dirac; Allison M Cole; Matthew Thompson Journal: J Am Board Fam Med Date: 2017 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 2.657
Authors: Marieke B Lemiengre; Jan Y Verbakel; Roos Colman; Tine De Burghgraeve; Frank Buntinx; Bert Aertgeerts; Frans De Baets; An De Sutter Journal: Br J Gen Pract Date: 2018-02-12 Impact factor: 5.386
Authors: Sarah Kg Tonkin-Crine; Pui San Tan; Oliver van Hecke; Kay Wang; Nia W Roberts; Amanda McCullough; Malene Plejdrup Hansen; Christopher C Butler; Chris B Del Mar Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2017-09-07