Change in evidence, guidelines, and education required for SAWB |
Medicine evolves (antibiotic courses are not always evidence based and have shortened), so open to SAWB if evidence and guidelines change (C) Antibiotic courses seem arbitrary — clinicians prescribe different courses and many patients do not take full courses anyway (C)
|
|
Current approach to antibiotics influences attitudes to SAWB |
SAWB seen as more appropriate and beneficial with longer antibiotic courses for UTIs or other infections (C and P), especially as it is already given with longer courses (C) SAWB advice already given or used in recurrent UTIs (C and P)
|
3-day antibiotics for UTIs are already short so SAWB would be less or not relevant for UTIs (C and P) SAWB with short courses for UTIs would have little impact or benefit so it is not a priority (C) Patients with experience of recurrent and/or complicated UTIs perceived current courses as already too short so were against stopping even earlier (P)
|
Balancing risks and benefits of SAWB is needed |
Would consider SAWB if evidence shows it is safe and beneficial (C and P) SAWB may help reduce antibiotic side effects (C and P) and antimicrobial resistance (C) SAWB may be more suitable for other infections than UTIs where risks of recurrence and/or complications are lower (P)
|
SAWB may lead to recurrence, complications, and antimicrobial resistance (C and P) Participants with recurrent and/or chronic UTIs were particularly concerned about SAWB causing resistant UTIs (P)
|
Importance of effective communication and personalisation of SAWB |
|
Unsure how SAWB should be best formulated and that it may be unclear to patients when to stop antibiotics (C and P) Unsure and concerned about what happens with unused or leftover antibiotics (C and P) SAWB inappropriate for those perceived to be unable to make treatment decisions (C and P)
|