P-808. Nudging Strategies in Microbiology Laboratory Reports: An Updated Systematic Review

Abstract Background Nudging strategies in microbiology laboratory reports can influence decision-making by helping clinicians make more appropriate antimicrobial prescribing choices. We aimed to update a 2019 scoping review to evaluate the existing literature on nudging in microbiology laboratory reports and its association with antimicrobial prescribing.Figure 1:PRISMA Diagram Methods In alignment with PRISMA reporting guidance, a comprehensive search was conducted across databases including Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, EBSCO CINAHL, Cochrane, and clinical trial registries, with no restrictions on language or start date. Key search terms targeted concepts of nudging, decision-making and behaviour, and microbiology. Eligible studies involved the use of nudging strategies in microbiology reports for all human populations in any healthcare setting, excluding non-interventional and simulated studies. The study protocol was registered a priori on PROSPERO (#CRD42024568670). Results A total of 36,339 studies were identified. After title/abstract and full-text screening, 44 studies were included (Figure 1). The majority were conducted in inpatient settings (n=39, 89%), focusing on adult patient populations (n=43, 98%). Most studies were published in the past 5 years (n=32, 73%). Selective, restrictive, cascade antimicrobial reporting was the most common primary nudging strategy (n=34, 77%), followed by framing or comments/recommendations to provide interpretation of the results (n=10, 23%). Many studies (n=39, 89%) evaluated antibiotic use as an outcome, with nudging associated with reduced/improved prescribing in 29 (74%). Conclusion Since our previous scoping review, the volume of research on nudging strategies in microbiology laboratory reports has grown substantially. The findings from this systematic review offer valuable insights for healthcare leaders and policy-makers, highlighting nudging practices that can be integrated into clinical microbiology workflows to promote responsible antimicrobial prescribing. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Open Forum Infectious Diseases
Published
2026-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofaf695.1016
Primary Topic
Bacterial Identification and Susceptibility Testing
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

P-808. Nudging Strategies in Microbiology Laboratory Reports: An Updated Systematic Review

Glyneva Bradley-Ridout, Larissa Matukas, Jenna Wong, Esther Jeong et al.
Open Forum Infectious Diseases
Bacterial Identification and Susceptibility Testing
article

P-808. Nudging Strategies in Microbiology Laboratory Reports: An Updated Systematic Review

Glyneva Bradley-Ridout, Larissa Matukas, Jenna Wong, Esther Jeong, Bradley J Langford, Vaishnav Sivakumar
article en

Abstract

Abstract Background Nudging strategies in microbiology laboratory reports can influence decision-making by helping clinicians make more appropriate antimicrobial prescribing choices. We aimed to update a 2019 scoping review to evaluate the existing literature on nudging in microbiology laboratory reports and its association with antimicrobial prescribing.Figure 1:PRISMA Diagram Methods In alignment with PRISMA reporting guidance, a comprehensive search was conducted across databases including Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, EBSCO CINAHL, Cochrane, and clinical trial registries, with no restrictions on language or start date. Key search terms targeted concepts of nudging, decision-making and behaviour, and microbiology. Eligible studies involved the use of nudging strategies in microbiology reports for all human populations in any healthcare setting, excluding non-interventional and simulated studies. The study protocol was registered a priori on PROSPERO (#CRD42024568670). Results A total of 36,339 studies were identified. After title/abstract and full-text screening, 44 studies were included (Figure 1). The majority were conducted in inpatient settings (n=39, 89%), focusing on adult patient populations (n=43, 98%). Most studies were published in the past 5 years (n=32, 73%). Selective, restrictive, cascade antimicrobial reporting was the most common primary nudging strategy (n=34, 77%), followed by framing or comments/recommendations to provide interpretation of the results (n=10, 23%). Many studies (n=39, 89%) evaluated antibiotic use as an outcome, with nudging associated with reduced/improved prescribing in 29 (74%). Conclusion Since our previous scoping review, the volume of research on nudging strategies in microbiology laboratory reports has grown substantially. The findings from this systematic review offer valuable insights for healthcare leaders and policy-makers, highlighting nudging practices that can be integrated into clinical microbiology workflows to promote responsible antimicrobial prescribing. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

Open Forum Infectious DiseasesVol. 13(Supplement_1)
University of Waterloo (CA), Toronto Public Health (CA), University of Toronto (CA), Public Health Ontario (CA)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 88%
Bacterial Identification and Susceptibility Testing
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.