Use of the FebriDx point-of-care test for lower respiratory tract infections in primary care: a qualitative interview study.

IF 2.5 Q2 PRIMARY HEALTH CARE BJGP Open Pub Date : 2024-10-29 Print Date: 2024-10-01 DOI:10.3399/BJGPO.2024.0024
Jill Rutter, Christopher R Wilcox, Nour Odeh, Ingrid Muller, Tristan W Clark, Paul Little, Firoza Davies, John McGavin, Nick Francis
{"title":"Use of the FebriDx point-of-care test for lower respiratory tract infections in primary care: a qualitative interview study.","authors":"Jill Rutter, Christopher R Wilcox, Nour Odeh, Ingrid Muller, Tristan W Clark, Paul Little, Firoza Davies, John McGavin, Nick Francis","doi":"10.3399/BJGPO.2024.0024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>FebriDx is a single-use, analyser-free, point-of-care test with markers for bacterial (C-reactive protein [CRP]) and viral (myxovirus resistance protein A [MxA]) infection, measured on a finger-prick blood sample.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>As part of a larger feasibility study, we explored the views of healthcare professionals (HCPs) and patients on the use of FebriDx to safely reduce antibiotic prescriptions for lower respiratory tract infections (LRTIs) in primary care.</p><p><strong>Design & setting: </strong>Remote semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted in South England.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>In total, 22 individuals (12 patients who underwent FebriDx testing and 10 HCPs from general practices that conducted testing) participated in interviews, which were analysed thematically.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Patients and HCPs expressed positive views about use of the test. They felt FebriDx was a useful tool to inform prescribing decisions and provided a visual aid to support shared decision making and appropriate antibiotic use. Most felt it would be feasible to integrate use into routine primary care consultations. Some practical difficulties with blood collection and interpreting results, which impacted on usability, were identified. Some patients' reactions to negative test results suggested the need for better communication alongside use of the test.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>FebriDx was perceived as a useful tool to guide antibiotic prescribing and support shared decision making. Initial practical problems with testing and communicating results are potential barriers to use. Training and practice on using the test and effective communication are likely to be important elements in ensuring patient understanding and satisfaction, and successful adoption.</p>","PeriodicalId":36541,"journal":{"name":"BJGP Open","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11523514/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BJGP Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3399/BJGPO.2024.0024","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Print","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PRIMARY HEALTH CARE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: FebriDx is a single-use, analyser-free, point-of-care test with markers for bacterial (C-reactive protein [CRP]) and viral (myxovirus resistance protein A [MxA]) infection, measured on a finger-prick blood sample.

Aim: As part of a larger feasibility study, we explored the views of healthcare professionals (HCPs) and patients on the use of FebriDx to safely reduce antibiotic prescriptions for lower respiratory tract infections (LRTIs) in primary care.

Design & setting: Remote semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted in South England.

Method: In total, 22 individuals (12 patients who underwent FebriDx testing and 10 HCPs from general practices that conducted testing) participated in interviews, which were analysed thematically.

Results: Patients and HCPs expressed positive views about use of the test. They felt FebriDx was a useful tool to inform prescribing decisions and provided a visual aid to support shared decision making and appropriate antibiotic use. Most felt it would be feasible to integrate use into routine primary care consultations. Some practical difficulties with blood collection and interpreting results, which impacted on usability, were identified. Some patients' reactions to negative test results suggested the need for better communication alongside use of the test.

Conclusion: FebriDx was perceived as a useful tool to guide antibiotic prescribing and support shared decision making. Initial practical problems with testing and communicating results are potential barriers to use. Training and practice on using the test and effective communication are likely to be important elements in ensuring patient understanding and satisfaction, and successful adoption.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在初级保健中使用 FebriDx® 下呼吸道感染护理点检测:一项定性访谈研究。
背景:FebriDx®是一种一次性使用、无需分析仪的床旁检测,通过指尖采血样本测量细菌(C反应蛋白[CRP])和病毒(粘液病毒抗性蛋白A[MxA])感染的标记物。目的:作为大型可行性研究的一部分,我们探讨了医疗保健专业人员(HCPs)和患者对使用FebriDx®安全减少初级保健中下呼吸道感染(LRTI)抗生素处方的看法:远程半结构化定性访谈 方法:22 名参与者(12 名接受 FebriDx® 检测的患者和 10 名进行检测的全科医生)参加了访谈,并对访谈结果进行了主题分析:结果:患者和保健医生对检测的使用表达了积极的看法。他们认为FebriDx是一个有用的工具,可为处方决策提供信息,并为共同决策和合理使用抗生素提供了可视化辅助工具。大多数人认为将其纳入常规初级保健咨询是可行的。在采血和解释结果方面发现了一些实际困难,这些困难影响了工具的可用性。一些患者对检测结果呈阴性的反应表明,在使用该检测方法的同时需要加强沟通:FebriDx®被认为是指导抗生素处方和支持共同决策的有用工具。最初在检测和结果沟通方面遇到的实际问题可能会阻碍其使用。关于使用该检验的培训和实践以及有效的沟通可能是确保患者理解和满意以及成功采用该检验的重要因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 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
期刊最新文献
Exploring the experiences, understandings, and expectations of exacerbations of patients with COPD and their carers: an interview study. Primary care-based interventions for secondary prevention of opioid dependence in patients with chronic non-cancer pain taking pharmaceutical opioids: a systematic review. How, when, and who should ask about pregnancy intentions in primary care? A qualitative study of primary healthcare professionals' preferences. Improving discharge summaries from hospital with a brief recommendation text box: results from a nationwide survey. Integrating public health and primary care: a framework for seamless collaboration.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1