Effectiveness of antitussives, anticholinergics or honey versus usual care in adults with uncomplicated acute bronchitis: a study protocol of an open randomised clinical trial in primary care.

INTRODUCTION: Despite the frequent use of therapies in acute bronchitis, the evidence of their benefit is lacking, since only a few clinical trials have been published, with low sample sizes, poor methodological quality and mainly in children. The objective of this study is to compare the effectiveness of three symptomatic therapies (dextromethorphan, ipratropium or honey) associated with usual care and the usual care in adults with acute bronchitis. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This will be a multicentre, pragmatic, parallel group, open randomised trial. Patients aged 18 or over with uncomplicated acute bronchitis, with cough for less than 3 weeks as the main symptom, scoring ≥4 in either daytime or nocturnal cough on a 7-point Likert scale, will be randomised to one of the following four groups: usual care, dextromethorphan 30 mg three times a day, ipratropium bromide inhaler 20 µg two puffs three times a day or honey 30 mg (a spoonful) three times a day, all taken for up to 14 days. The exclusion criteria will be pneumonia, criteria for hospital admission, pregnancy or lactation, concomitant pulmonary disease, associated significant comorbidity, allergy, intolerance or contraindication to any of the study drugs or admitted to a long-term residence. SAMPLE: 668 patients. The primary outcome will be the number of days with moderate-to-severe cough. All patients will be given a paper-based symptom diary to be self-administered. A second visit will be scheduled at day 2 or 3 for assessing evolution, with two more visits at days 15 and 29 for clinical assessment, evaluation of adverse effects, re-attendance and complications. Patients still with symptoms at day 29 will be called 6 weeks after the baseline visit. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has been approved by the Ethical Board of IDIAP Jordi Gol (reference number: AC18/002). The findings of this trial will be disseminated through research conferences and peer-review journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03738917; Pre-results.

Efficacy of high doses of penicillin versus amoxicillin in the treatment of uncomplicated community acquired pneumonia in adults. A non-inferiority controlled clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is treated with penicillin in some northern European countries. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate whether high-dose penicillin V is as effective as high-dose amoxicillin for the treatment of non-severe CAP. DESIGN: Multicentre, parallel, double-blind, controlled, randomized clinical trial. SETTING: 31 primary care centers in Spain. PARTICIPANTS: Patients from 18 to 75 years of age with no significant associated comorbidity and with symptoms of lower respiratory tract infection and radiological confirmation of CAP were randomized to receive either penicillin V 1.6 million units, or amoxicillin 1000mg three times per day for 10 days. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: The main outcome was clinical cure at 14 days, and the primary hypothesis was that penicillin V would be non-inferior to amoxicillin with regard to this outcome, with a margin of 15% for the difference in proportions. EudraCT register 2012-003511-63. RESULTS: A total of 43 subjects (amoxicillin: 28; penicillin: 15) were randomized. Clinical cure was observed in 10 (90.9%) patients assigned to penicillin and in 25 (100%) patients assigned to amoxicillin with a difference of -9.1% (95% CI, -41.3% to 6.4%; p=.951) for non-inferiority. In the intention-to-treat analysis, amoxicillin was found to be 28.6% superior to penicillin (95% CI, 7.3-58.1%; p=.009 for superiority). The number of adverse events was similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: There was a trend favoring high-dose amoxicillin versus high-dose penicillin in adults with uncomplicated CAP. The main limitation of this trial was the low statistical power due to the low number of patients included.

Impact of rapid antigen detection testing on antibiotic prescription in acute pharyngitis in adults. FARINGOCAT STUDY: a multicentric randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Acute pharyngitis is one of the most frequent consultations to the general practitioner and in most of the cases an antibiotic is prescribed in primary care in Spain. Bacterial etiology, mainly by group A beta-hemolytic streptococcus (GABHS), accounts for 10-20% of all these infections in adults. The purpose of this study is to assess the impact of rapid antigen detection testing (RADT) to identify GABHS in acute pharyngitis on the utilization of antibiotics in primary care. METHODS/DESIGN: Multicentric randomized controlled trial in which antibiotic prescription between two groups of patients with acute pharyngitis will be compared. The trial will include two arms, a control and an intervention group in which RADT will be performed. The primary outcome measure will be the proportion of inappropriate antibiotic prescription in each group. Two hundred seventy-six patients are required to detect a reduction in antibiotic prescription from 85% in the control group to 75% in the intervention group with a power of 90% and a level of significance of 5%. Secondary outcome measures will be specific antibiotic treatment, antibiotic resistance rates, secondary effects, days without working, medical visits during the first month and patient satisfaction. DISCUSSION: The implementation of RADT would allow a more rational use of antibiotics and would prevent adverse effects of antibiotics, emergence of antibiotic resistance and the growth of inefficient health expenses.