Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
addClaim

[Lower respiratory tract infections unravelled].

Authors: Rogier M, Hopstaken;

[Lower respiratory tract infections unravelled].

Abstract

Global initiatives to tackle the rise of antimicrobial resistance highlight the need to invest in the development and use of new, rapid diagnostic tools in routine patient care to differentiate bacterial from viral infections. Selective use may enhance antibiotic stewardship, but should be based on evidence for the target populations. The landmark study of Ieven et al. in 11 European countries describes the role of bacteria, viruses and mixed bacterial-viral infections in adults presenting with mostly non-severe lower respiratory tract infections in primary care. Viruses, particularly rhinoviruses, were much more frequent than bacterial pathogens. The authors conclude that their new findings support a restrictive approach to antibiotic prescribing. Better diagnostics for aetiology are advocated for use in primary care. This article discusses the impact of these new data on the already broadly shared views on antibiotic stewardship, including restrictive use of antibiotics in non-severe infections. The question is raised whether the possible benefits of broad implementation of specific, diagnostic tests for aetiology outweigh the possible harm in primary care. Proper consultation skills are key for differentiating one patient with a severe infection from the many non-severe infections. Treating patients, not diagnoses prevails.

Keywords

Adult, Europe, Male, Antimicrobial Stewardship, Primary Health Care, Humans, Female, Referral and Consultation, Respiratory Tract Infections, Anti-Bacterial Agents

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
0
Average
Average
Average
Related to Research communities
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!