Development of a Bronchoscopy-Radiologic Skills and Task Assessment Tool (BRadSTAT): A Tool for Evaluating the Radiological Skills of Bronchoscopists with Different Experience.

BACKGROUND: Competency using radiologic images for bronchoscopic navigation is presumed during subspecialty training, but no assessments objectively measure combined knowledge of radiologic interpretation and ability to maneuver a bronchoscope into peripheral airways. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were (i) to determine whether the Bronchoscopy-Radiology Skills and Tasks Assessment Tool (BRadSTAT) discriminates between bronchoscopists of various levels of experience and (ii) to improve construct validity using study findings. METHODS: BRadSTAT contains 10 questions that assess chest X-ray and CT scan interpretation using multiple images per question and 2 technical skill assessments. After administration to 33 bronchoscopists (5 Beginners, 9 Intermediates, 10 Experienced, and 9 Experts), discriminative power was strengthened using differential weighting on CT-related questions, producing the BRadSTAT-CT score. Cut points for both scores were determined via cross-validation. RESULTS: Mean BRadSTAT scores for Beginner, Intermediate, Experienced, and Expert were 74 (±13 SD), 78 (±14), 86 (±9), and 88 (±8), respectively. Statistically significant differences were noted between Expert and Beginner, Expert and Intermediate, and Experienced and Beginner (all p ≤ 0.05). Mean BRadSTAT-CT scores for Beginner, Intermediate, Experienced, and Expert were 63 (±14), 74 (±15), 82 (±13), and 90 (±9), respectively, all statistically significant (p ≤ 0.03). Cut points for BRadSTAT-CT had lower sensitivity but greater specificity and accuracy than for BRadSTAT. CONCLUSION: BRadSTAT represents the first validated assessment tool measuring knowledge and skills for bronchoscopic access to peripheral airways, which discriminates between bronchoscopists of various experience levels. Refining BRadSTAT produced the BRadSTAT-CT, which had higher discriminative power. Future studies should focus on their usefulness in competency-based bronchoscopy programs.

Australasian Malignant PLeural Effusion (AMPLE)-4 trial: study protocol for a multi-centre randomised trial of topical antibiotics prophylaxis for infections of indwelling pleural catheters.

BACKGROUND: Malignant pleural effusion (MPE) is a debilitating condition as it commonly causes disabling breathlessness and impairs quality of life (QoL). Indwelling pleural catheter (IPC) offers an effective alternative for the management of MPE. However, IPC-related infections remain a significant concern and there are currently no long-term strategies for their prevention. The Australasian Malignant PLeural Effusion (AMPLE)-4 trial is a multicentre randomised trial that evaluates the use of topical mupirocin prophylaxis (vs no mupirocin) to reduce catheter-related infections in patients with MPE treated with an IPC. METHODS: A pragmatic, multi-centre, open-labelled, randomised trial. Eligible patients with MPE and an IPC will be randomised 1:1 to either regular topical mupirocin prophylaxis or no mupirocin (standard care). For the interventional arm, topical mupirocin will be applied around the IPC exit-site after each drainage, at least twice weekly. Weekly follow-up via phone calls or in person will be conducted for up to 6 months. The primary outcome is the percentage of patients who develop an IPC-related (pleural, skin, or tract) infection between the time of catheter insertion and end of follow-up period. Secondary outcomes include analyses of infection (types and episodes), hospitalisation days, health economics, adverse events, and survival. Subject to interim analyses, the trial will recruit up to 418 participants. DISCUSSION: Results from this trial will determine the efficacy of mupirocin prophylaxis in patients who require IPC for MPE. It will provide data on infection rates, microbiology, and potentially infection pathways associated with IPC-related infections. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Sir Charles Gairdner and Osborne Park Health Care Group Human Research Ethics Committee has approved the study (RGS0000005920). Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at scientific conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australia New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry ACTRN12623000253606. Registered on 9 March 2023.