Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 10, 2026

Multiplex Therapeutic Drug Monitoring by Isotope-dilution HPLC-MS/MS of Antibiotics in Critical Illnesses
Published on: August 30, 2018
Integrating Infectious Disease Experts into Primary Care Antibiotic Stewardship: A Multicentre, Cluster-Randomised,
Mar Ronda1, Ariadna Padullés2, Jordi Carratalà3
1Department of Infectious Diseases. Bellvitge University Hospital, Bellvitge Biomedical Research Institute (IDIBELL), L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain; University of Barcelona, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Barcelona, Spain.
Objective:
To assess the impact of integrating infectious disease (ID) experts into primary care antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) programmes on antibiotic consumption and prescribing adequacy for upper respiratory tract infections (URTIs) and urinary tract infections (UTIs).
Methods:
A multicentre, cluster-randomised trial across six primary care centres in Catalonia, Spain. All centres implemented a standard AMS programme, with three randomised to an advanced AMS (receiving ID expert support via a telephone helpline and biweekly meetings). The primary endpoint was total antibiotic consumption (defined daily doses per 1,000 inhabitants per day [DID]). Secondary endpoints included unnecessary and inadequate prescriptions, and 30-day reconsultations or hospitalisations, evaluated through point-prevalence surveys in patients aged over 14 years with URTI or UTI.
Results:
Between October 2021 and March 2023, overall antibiotic consumption increased from 7.08 (SD 1.29) to 7.79 (SD 1.65) DID (mean difference +0.71 [95% CI 0.13;1.28]). This rise was lower under advanced AMS, from 7.16 (SD 1.33) to 7.56 (SD 1.44) DID (+0.40 [95% CI -0.40;1.20]) than standard AMS, from 7.00 (SD 1.29) to 8.01 (SD 1.82) DID (+1.01 [95% CI 0.15;1.88]). During the intervention, Poisson regression showed a 4% monthly DID increase (IRR 1.04 [95% CI 1.01;1.06]), without intergroup differences (IRR 0.95 [95% CI 0.19;4.74]). Across 1,389 URTI/UTI episodes, 25.0% of prescriptions were unnecessary and 50.3% of indicated treatments were inadequate. By intervention end, advanced AMS reduced unnecessary (21.2% vs 28.3%; OR 0.68 [95% CI 0.51;0.91]) and inadequate prescriptions (38.8% vs 52.9%; OR 0.54 [95% CI 0.36;0.81]) compared with standard AMS. Reconsultations or hospitalisations showed no significant differences.
Conclusion:
Integrating ID experts into primary care AMS did not demonstrate a statistically significant reduction in total antibiotic use. However, the data suggest a positive impact on prescribing quality without compromising patient safety. Health policymakers should consider embedding ID expertise within primary care AMS frameworks.
Related Concept Videos
Healthcare Associated Infections II: Preventive Measures
The best practices for preventing healthcare-associated infections include hand hygiene, patient risk...
Clinical Significance of Antibiotic Resistance
Urinary Tract Infection III: Diagnostic Studies and Interprofessional Care
Antibiotic Selection
Endocarditis III: Medical Management