Nursing Performance Using Clinical Prediction Rules for Acute Respiratory Infection Management: A Case-Based Simulation

Background Overuse and misuse of antibiotics is an urgent healthcare problem and one of the key factors in antibiotic resistance. Validated clinical prediction rules have shown effectiveness in guiding providers to an appropriate diagnosis and identifying when antibiotics are the recommended choice for treatment. Objective We aimed to study the relative ability of registered nurses using clinical prediction rules to guide the management of acute respiratory infections in a simulated environment compared to practicing primary care physicians. Design We evaluated a case-based simulation of the diagnosis and treatment for acute respiratory infections using clinical prediction rules. As a secondary outcome, we examined nursing self-efficacy by administering a survey before and after case evaluations. Participants Participants included 40 registered nurses from three academic medical centers and five primary care physicians as comparators. Participants evaluated six simulated case studies, three for patients presenting with cough symptoms and three for sore throat. Key Results Compared to physicians, nurses determined risk and treatment for simulated sore throat cases using clinical prediction rules with nurses having 100% accuracy in low-risk sore throat cases versus 80% for physicians. We found great variability in the accuracy of the risk level and appropriate treatment for cough cases. Nurses reported slight increases in self-efficacy from baseline to post-case evaluation suggesting further information is needed to understand correlation. Conclusions Clinical prediction rules used by nurses in sore throat management workflows can guide accurate diagnosis and treatment in simulated cases, while cough management requires further exploration. Our results support the future implementation of automated prediction rules in a clinical decision support tool and a thorough examination of their effect on clinical practice and patient outcomes.

Publication History

Received: 27 February 2025

Accepted after revision: 09 September 2025

Accepted Manuscript online:
15 September 2025