Skip to main content
. 2018 Oct 24;8(10):e023925. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-023925

Table 2.

Summary of general practice staff views on C reactive protein (CRP) stratified by implementation rates

Practice group Views on implementation successes Lesson learnt from implementation
High CRP uptake
  1. Training on CRP machines.

  2. Funding available.

  3. One main user of CRP point-of-care testing (POCT).

  4. Machine located in main users room.

  5. Prescribing pharmacists ideally placed to be main user (20 min appointments).

  1. GP time is limited.

Medium CRP uptake
  1. Training on CRP machines.

  2. Funding available.

  3. One/two main users of CRP POCT.

  4. Machine located in a room accessible by all or located on a mobile trolley.

  5. Nurses ideally placed to be main user (20 min appointments).

  1. Lots of error readings reduced staff and patient confidence.

  2. Smaller, lighter and portable machine required.

Low CRP uptake
  1. Training on CRP machines.

  2. Funding available.

  3. Use National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidance.

  1. Many users cause problems.

  2. General practitioner’s have time constraints.

  3. Healthcare assistant or nurse could administer the test.

  4. Location of machine; needs to be accessible.

  5. Forgot to use the machine; adapt into day-to-day practice.

  6. Switch machine on every morning.

  7. Check machine has been calibrated.

Views on how to implement
CRP POCT in general practice
Concerns on implementing
CRP POCT in general practice
Declined CRP
  1. Not feasible in a small practice.

  1. Increase appointment length.

  2. Reluctance to change.

  3. Patients will go ‘antibiotic shopping’ regardless of result.

Control practices
  1. Training on CRP machine and interpreting results.

  2. Locate in minor ailment clinic.

  3. Access by all clinicians.

  4. Adapt clinical workflow.

  5. Use NICE guidance.

  1. Time management in busy clinic.

  2. Cost implications to the practice.