Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 25
Filtrar
1.
Br J Gen Pract ; 70(696): e505-e513, 2020 07.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32424045

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Antibiotics are prescribed to >70% of patients presenting in primary care with an acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD). The PACE randomised controlled trial found that a C-reactive protein point-of-care test (CRP-POCT) management strategy for AECOPD in primary care resulted in a 20% reduction in patient-reported antibiotic consumption over 4 weeks. AIM: To understand perceptions of the value of CRP-POCT for guiding antibiotic prescribing for AECOPD; explore possible mechanisms, mediators, and pathways to effects; and identify potential barriers and facilitators to implementation from the perspectives of patients and clinicians. DESIGN AND SETTING: Qualitative process evaluation in UK general practices. METHOD: Semi-structured telephone interviews with 20 patients presenting with an AECOPD and 20 primary care staff, purposively sampled from the PACE study. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analysed using framework analysis. RESULTS: Patients and clinicians felt that CRP-POCT was useful in guiding clinicians' antibiotic prescribing decisions for AECOPD, and were positive about introduction of the test in routine care. The CRP-POCT enhanced clinician confidence in antibiotic prescribing decisions, reduced decisional ambiguity, and facilitated communication with patients. Some clinicians thought the CRP-POCT should be routinely used in consultations for AECOPD; others favoured use only when there was decisional uncertainty. CRP-POCT cartridge preparation time and cost were potential barriers to implementation. CONCLUSION: CRP-POCT-guided antibiotic prescribing for AECOPD had high acceptability, but commissioning arrangements and further simplification of the CRP-POCT need attention to facilitate implementation in routine practice.


Asunto(s)
Medicina General , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Proteína C-Reactiva , Humanos , Pruebas en el Punto de Atención , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/tratamiento farmacológico
2.
Health Technol Assess ; 24(15): 1-108, 2020 03.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32202490

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Most patients presenting with acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) in primary care are prescribed antibiotics, but these may not be beneficial, and they can cause side effects and increase the risk of subsequent resistant infections. Point-of-care tests (POCTs) could safely reduce inappropriate antibiotic prescribing and antimicrobial resistance. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether or not the use of a C-reactive protein (CRP) POCT to guide prescribing decisions for AECOPD reduces antibiotic consumption without having a negative impact on chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) health status and is cost-effective. DESIGN: A multicentre, parallel-arm, randomised controlled open trial with an embedded process, and a health economic evaluation. SETTING: General practices in Wales and England. A UK NHS perspective was used for the economic analysis. PARTICIPANTS: Adults (aged ≥ 40 years) with a primary care diagnosis of COPD, presenting with an AECOPD (with at least one of increased dyspnoea, increased sputum volume and increased sputum purulence) of between 24 hours' and 21 days' duration. INTERVENTION: CRP POCTs to guide antibiotic prescribing decisions for AECOPD, compared with usual care (no CRP POCT), using remote online randomisation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Patient-reported antibiotic consumption for AECOPD within 4 weeks post randomisation and COPD health status as measured with the Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ) at 2 weeks. For the economic evaluation, patient-reported resource use and the EuroQol-5 Dimensions were included. RESULTS: In total, 653 participants were randomised from 86 general practices. Three withdrew consent and one was randomised in error, leaving 324 participants in the usual-care arm and 325 participants in the CRP POCT arm. Antibiotics were consumed for AECOPD by 212 out of 274 participants (77.4%) and 150 out of 263 participants (57.0%) in the usual-care and CRP POCT arm, respectively [adjusted odds ratio 0.31, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.20 to 0.47]. The CCQ analysis comprised 282 and 281 participants in the usual-care and CRP POCT arms, respectively, and the adjusted mean CCQ score difference at 2 weeks was 0.19 points (two-sided 90% CI -0.33 to -0.05 points). The upper limit of the CI did not contain the prespecified non-inferiority margin of 0.3. The total cost from a NHS perspective at 4 weeks was £17.59 per patient higher in the CRP POCT arm (95% CI -£34.80 to £69.98; p = 0.408). The mean incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were £222 per 1% reduction in antibiotic consumption compared with usual care at 4 weeks and £15,251 per quality-adjusted life-year gained at 6 months with no significant changes in sensitivity analyses. Patients and clinicians were generally supportive of including CRP POCT in the assessment of AECOPD. CONCLUSIONS: A CRP POCT diagnostic strategy achieved meaningful reductions in patient-reported antibiotic consumption without impairing COPD health status or increasing costs. There were no associated harms and both patients and clinicians valued the diagnostic strategy. FUTURE WORK: Implementation studies that also build on our qualitative findings could help determine the effect of this intervention over the longer term. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN24346473. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 15. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.


People with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) often experience flare-ups known as acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Antibiotics are prescribed for most flare-ups, but they do not always benefit patients and may cause harm, such as side effects or subsequent infections that are resistant. Rapid point-of-care tests (POCTs) can be used to help determine when antibiotics are more likely to be needed. C-reactive protein (CRP) is a marker of inflammation that can be measured with a POCT. Patients with flare-ups and a low CRP value are less likely to benefit from antibiotics. The PACE trial asked whether or not measuring CRP with a POCT could lead to fewer antibiotics being consumed for flare-ups, without having negative effects for patients. We aimed to recruit 650 patients with a COPD flare-up from primary care. Patients were randomly assigned to either (1) usual care with the addition of a CRP POCT, or (2) usual care without the addition of the test. Antibiotic use over the first 4 weeks and patients' self-assessment of their health 2 weeks after enrolment were measured in both groups. Patients in the CRP test group used fewer antibiotics than those managed as usual, and had improved patient-reported outcomes. Costs were a little higher in the CRP POCT group. Interviews with patients and clinicians found that they appreciated the CRP test being included in the decision-making process.


Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos , Proteína C-Reactiva/análisis , Prescripción Inadecuada , Pruebas en el Punto de Atención , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/tratamiento farmacológico , Adulto , Antibacterianos/efectos adversos , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Análisis Costo-Beneficio/economía , Femenino , Medicina General , Humanos , Entrevistas como Asunto , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Encuestas y Cuestionarios
3.
BJGP Open ; 4(2)2020 Jun.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31964636

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Most people with sore throat do not benefit from antibiotic treatment, but nearly three-quarters of those presenting in primary care are prescribed antibiotics. A test that is predictive of bacterial infection could help guide antibiotic prescribing. Calprotectin is a biomarker of neutrophilic inflammation, and may be a useful marker of bacterial throat infections. AIM: To assess the feasibility of measuring calprotectin from throat swabs, and assess whether individuals with sore throats likely to be caused by streptococcal infections have apparently higher throat calprotectin levels than other individuals with sore throat and healthy volunteers. DESIGN & SETTING: A proof of concept case-control study was undertaken, which compared primary care patients with sore throats and healthy volunteers. METHOD: Baseline characteristics and throat swabs were collected from 30 primary care patients with suspected streptococcal sore throat, and throat swabs were taken from 10 volunteers without sore throat. Calprotectin level determination and rapid antigen streptococcal testing were conducted on the throat swab eluents. Calprotectin levels in the following groups were compared: volunteers without a sore throat; all patients with a sore throat; patients with a sore throat testing either negative or positive for streptococcal antigen; and those with lower and higher scores on clinical prediction rules for streptococcal sore throat. RESULTS: Calprotectin was detected in all throat swab samples. Mean calprotectin levels were numerically higher in patients with sore throat compared with healthy volunteers, and sore throat patients who had group A streptococci antigen detected compared with those who did not. CONCLUSION: Calprotectin can be measured from throat swab samples and levels are consistent with the hypothesis that streptococcal infection leads to higher throat calprotectin levels. This hypothesis will be tested in a larger study.

4.
Sci Rep ; 9(1): 19694, 2019 12 23.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31873085

RESUMEN

Women with uncomplicated urinary tract infection (UTI) symptoms are commonly treated with empirical antibiotics, resulting in overuse of antibiotics, which promotes antimicrobial resistance. Available diagnostic tools are either not cost-effective or diagnostically sub-optimal. Here, we identified clinical and urinary immunological predictors for UTI diagnosis. We explored 17 clinical and 42 immunological potential predictors for bacterial culture among women with uncomplicated UTI symptoms using random forest or support vector machine coupled with recursive feature elimination. Urine cloudiness was the best performing clinical predictor to rule out (negative likelihood ratio [LR-] = 0.4) and rule in (LR+ = 2.6) UTI. Using a more discriminatory scale to assess cloudiness (turbidity) increased the accuracy of UTI prediction further (LR+ = 4.4). Urinary levels of MMP9, NGAL, CXCL8 and IL-1ß together had a higher LR+ (6.1) and similar LR- (0.4), compared to cloudiness. Varying the bacterial count thresholds for urine culture positivity did not alter best clinical predictor selection, but did affect the number of immunological predictors required for reaching an optimal prediction. We conclude that urine cloudiness is particularly helpful in ruling out negative UTI cases. The identified urinary biomarkers could be used to develop a point of care test for UTI but require further validation.


Asunto(s)
Biomarcadores/orina , Infecciones Urinarias/diagnóstico , Infecciones Urinarias/orina , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Algoritmos , Diagnóstico por Computador , Femenino , Humanos , Factores Inmunológicos/orina , Interleucina-1beta/orina , Interleucina-8/orina , Funciones de Verosimilitud , Lipocalina 2/orina , Aprendizaje Automático , Metaloproteinasa 9 de la Matriz/orina , Persona de Mediana Edad , Nefelometría y Turbidimetría , Pruebas en el Punto de Atención , Máquina de Vectores de Soporte , Infecciones Urinarias/inmunología , Adulto Joven
5.
N Engl J Med ; 381(2): 111-120, 2019 07 11.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31291514

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Point-of-care testing of C-reactive protein (CRP) may be a way to reduce unnecessary use of antibiotics without harming patients who have acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). METHODS: We performed a multicenter, open-label, randomized, controlled trial involving patients with a diagnosis of COPD in their primary care clinical record who consulted a clinician at 1 of 86 general medical practices in England and Wales for an acute exacerbation of COPD. The patients were assigned to receive usual care guided by CRP point-of-care testing (CRP-guided group) or usual care alone (usual-care group). The primary outcomes were patient-reported use of antibiotics for acute exacerbations of COPD within 4 weeks after randomization (to show superiority) and COPD-related health status at 2 weeks after randomization, as measured by the Clinical COPD Questionnaire, a 10-item scale with scores ranging from 0 (very good COPD health status) to 6 (extremely poor COPD health status) (to show noninferiority). RESULTS: A total of 653 patients underwent randomization. Fewer patients in the CRP-guided group reported antibiotic use than in the usual-care group (57.0% vs. 77.4%; adjusted odds ratio, 0.31; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.20 to 0.47). The adjusted mean difference in the total score on the Clinical COPD Questionnaire at 2 weeks was -0.19 points (two-sided 90% CI, -0.33 to -0.05) in favor of the CRP-guided group. The antibiotic prescribing decisions made by clinicians at the initial consultation were ascertained for all but 1 patient, and antibiotic prescriptions issued over the first 4 weeks of follow-up were ascertained for 96.9% of the patients. A lower percentage of patients in the CRP-guided group than in the usual-care group received an antibiotic prescription at the initial consultation (47.7% vs. 69.7%, for a difference of 22.0 percentage points; adjusted odds ratio, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.21 to 0.45) and during the first 4 weeks of follow-up (59.1% vs. 79.7%, for a difference of 20.6 percentage points; adjusted odds ratio, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.20 to 0.46). Two patients in the usual-care group died within 4 weeks after randomization from causes considered by the investigators to be unrelated to trial participation. CONCLUSIONS: CRP-guided prescribing of antibiotics for exacerbations of COPD in primary care clinics resulted in a lower percentage of patients who reported antibiotic use and who received antibiotic prescriptions from clinicians, with no evidence of harm. (Funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Program; PACE Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN24346473.).


Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Proteína C-Reactiva/análisis , Prescripción Inadecuada/prevención & control , Pruebas en el Punto de Atención , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/tratamiento farmacológico , Anciano , Biomarcadores/sangre , Femenino , Estado de Salud , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/normas , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/estadística & datos numéricos , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/sangre
6.
Pediatr Infect Dis J ; 38(5): e82-e86, 2019 05.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30256315

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Infectious disease (ID) pandemics pose a considerable global threat and can disproportionately affect vulnerable populations including children. Pediatric clinical research in pandemics is essential to improve children's healthcare and minimize risks of harm by interventions that lack an adequate evidence base for this population. The unique features of ID pandemics require consideration of special processes to facilitate clinical research. We aimed to obtain consensus on pediatric clinician-researchers' perceptions of the priorities to feasibly conduct clinical pediatric pandemic research in Europe. METHODS: Mixed method study in 2 stages, recruiting pediatric clinician-researchers with experience of conducting pediatric ID research in clinical settings in Europe. Stage 1 was an expert stakeholder workshop and interviews. Discussions focused on participant's experience of conducting pediatric ID research and processes to facilitate pandemic research. Information informed stage 2, an online consensus survey to identify pediatric inician-researchers priorities to enable ID pandemic research. RESULTS: Twenty-three pediatric clinician-researchers attended the workshop and 39 completed the survey. Priorities were primarily focused on structural and operational requirements of research design and regulation: (1) clarity within the European Clinical Trials Directive for pediatric pandemic research; (2) simplified regulatory processes for research involving clinical samples and data; and (3) improved relationships between regulatory bodies and researchers. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that changes need to be made to the current regulatory environment to facilitate and improve pediatric research in the pandemic context. These findings can provide expert evidence to research policy decision-makers and regulators and to develop a strategy to lobby for change.


Asunto(s)
Investigación Biomédica/organización & administración , Control de Enfermedades Transmisibles/métodos , Enfermedades Transmisibles/epidemiología , Manejo de la Enfermedad , Transmisión de Enfermedad Infecciosa/prevención & control , Pandemias , Investigación , Enfermedades Transmisibles/diagnóstico , Enfermedades Transmisibles/terapia , Enfermedades Transmisibles/transmisión , Europa (Continente)/epidemiología , Humanos
7.
Health Technol Assess ; 22(61): 1-114, 2018 11.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30407151

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Children with hearing loss associated with otitis media with effusion (OME) are commonly managed through surgical intervention, hearing aids or watchful waiting. A safe, inexpensive, effective medical treatment would enhance treatment options. Small, poorly conducted trials have found a short-term benefit from oral steroids. OBJECTIVE: To determine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a 7-day course of oral steroids in improving hearing at 5 weeks in children with persistent OME symptoms and current bilateral OME and hearing loss demonstrated by audiometry. DESIGN: Double-blind, individually randomised, placebo-controlled trial. SETTING: Ear, nose and throat outpatient or paediatric audiology and audiovestibular medicine clinics in Wales and England. PARTICIPANTS: Children aged 2-8 years, with symptoms of hearing loss attributable to OME for at least 3 months, a diagnosis of bilateral OME made on the day of recruitment and audiometry-confirmed hearing loss. INTERVENTIONS: A 7-day course of oral soluble prednisolone, as a single daily dose of 20 mg for children aged 2-5 years or 30 mg for 6- to 8-year-olds, or matched placebo. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Acceptable hearing at 5 weeks from randomisation. Secondary outcomes comprised acceptable hearing at 6 and 12 months, tympanometry, otoscopic findings, health-care consultations related to OME and other resource use, proportion of children who had ventilation tube (grommet) surgery at 6 and 12 months, adverse effects, symptoms, functional health status, health-related quality of life, short- and longer-term cost-effectiveness. RESULTS: A total of 389 children were randomised. Satisfactory hearing at 5 weeks was achieved by 39.9% and 32.8% in the oral steroid and placebo groups, respectively (absolute difference of 7.1%, 95% confidence interval -2.8% to 16.8%; number needed to treat = 14). This difference was not statistically significant. The secondary outcomes were consistent with the picture of a small or no benefit, and we found no subgroups that achieved a meaningful benefit from oral steroids. The economic analysis showed that treatment with oral steroids was more expensive and accrued fewer quality-adjusted life-years than treatment as usual. However, the differences were small and not statistically significant, and the sensitivity analyses demonstrated large variation in the results. CONCLUSIONS: OME in children with documented hearing loss and attributable symptoms for at least 3 months has a high rate of spontaneous resolution. Discussions about watchful waiting and other interventions will be enhanced by this evidence. The findings of this study suggest that any benefit from a short course of oral steroids for OME is likely to be small and of questionable clinical significance, and that the treatment is unlikely to be cost-effective and, therefore, their use cannot be recommended. FUTURE WORK: Studies exploring optimal approaches to sharing natural history data and enhancing shared decision-making are needed for this condition. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN49798431 and EudraCT 2012-005123-32. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 22, No. 61. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.


Asunto(s)
Glucocorticoides/uso terapéutico , Pérdida Auditiva/tratamiento farmacológico , Pérdida Auditiva/etiología , Otitis Media con Derrame/complicaciones , Prednisolona/uso terapéutico , Administración Oral , Audiometría , Niño , Preescolar , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Método Doble Ciego , Femenino , Glucocorticoides/efectos adversos , Glucocorticoides/economía , Estado de Salud , Humanos , Masculino , Prednisolona/efectos adversos , Prednisolona/economía , Calidad de Vida , Años de Vida Ajustados por Calidad de Vida
8.
Lancet ; 392(10147): 557-568, 2018 08 18.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30152390

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Children with persistent hearing loss due to otitis media with effusion are commonly managed by surgical intervention. A safe, cheap, and effective medical treatment would enhance treatment options. Underpowered, poor-quality trials have found short-term benefit from oral steroids. We aimed to investigate whether a short course of oral steroids would achieve acceptable hearing in children with persistent otitis media with effusion and hearing loss. METHODS: In this individually randomised, parallel, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial we recruited children aged 2-8 years with symptoms attributable to otitis media with effusion for at least 3 months and with confirmed bilateral hearing loss. Participants were recruited from 20 ear, nose, and throat (ENT), paediatric audiology, and audiovestibular medicine outpatient departments in England and Wales. Participants were randomly allocated (1:1) to sequentially numbered identical prednisolone (oral steroid) or placebo packs by use of computer-generated random permuted block sizes stratified by site and child's age. The primary outcome was audiometry-confirmed acceptable hearing at 5 weeks. All analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN Registry, number ISRCTN49798431. FINDINGS: Between March 20, 2014, and April 5, 2016, 1018 children were screened, of whom 389 were randomised. 200 were assigned to receive oral steroids and 189 to receive placebo. Hearing at 5 weeks was assessed in 183 children in the oral steroid group and in 180 in the placebo group. Acceptable hearing was observed in 73 (40%) children in the oral steroid group and in 59 (33%) in the placebo group (absolute difference 7% [95% CI -3 to 17], number needed to treat 14; adjusted odds ratio 1·36 [95% CI 0·88-2·11]; p=0·16). There was no evidence of any significant differences in adverse events or quality-of-life measures between the groups. INTERPRETATION: Otitis media with effusion in children with documented hearing loss and attributable symptoms for at least 3 months has a high rate of spontaneous resolution. A short course of oral prednisolone is not an effective treatment for most children aged 2-8 years with persistent otitis media with effusion, but is well tolerated. One in 14 children might achieve improved hearing but not quality of life. Discussions about watchful waiting and other interventions will be supported by this evidence. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme.


Asunto(s)
Glucocorticoides/uso terapéutico , Otitis Media con Derrame/tratamiento farmacológico , Prednisolona/uso terapéutico , Administración Oral , Audiometría , Niño , Preescolar , Método Doble Ciego , Femenino , Glucocorticoides/administración & dosificación , Pérdida Auditiva/prevención & control , Humanos , Masculino , Otitis Media con Derrame/complicaciones , Prednisolona/administración & dosificación
9.
PLoS One ; 13(8): e0200531, 2018.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30067760

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Point of care tests (POCTs) are increasingly being promoted for guiding the primary medical care of community acquired lower respiratory tract infections (CA-LRTI). POCT development has seldom been guided by explicitly identified clinical need and requirements of the intended users. Approaches for identifying POCT priorities and developing target product profiles (TPPs) for POCTs in primary medical care are not well developed, and there is no published TPP for a CA-LRTI POCT aimed at developed countries. METHODS: We conducted workshops with expert stakeholders and a survey with primary care clinicians to produce a target product profile (TPP) to guide the development of a clinically relevant and technologically feasible POCT for CA-LRTI. RESULTS: Participants with clinical, academic, industrial, technological and basic scientific backgrounds contributed to four expert workshops, and 45 practicing primary care clinicians responded to an online survey and prioritised community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) as the CA-LRTI where a new POCT was most urgently needed. Consensus was reached on a TPP document that included information on the intended niche in the clinical pathway in primary medical care; diagnostic product specification (intended use statement and test concept), and minimum and ideal user specifications. Clinicians minimum requirements of a CA-LRTI POCT included the use of minimally invasive samples, a result in less than 30 minutes, no more than a single preparation step, minimum operational requirements, and detection of common respiratory pathogens and their resistance to commonly prescribed antibiotics. CONCLUSIONS: This multidisciplinary, multistage partnership approach generated a clinically-driven TPP for guiding the development of a new POCT, and this approach as well as the TPP itself may be useful to others developing a new POCT.


Asunto(s)
Sistemas de Atención de Punto , Infecciones del Sistema Respiratorio/diagnóstico , Conferencias de Consenso como Asunto , Europa (Continente) , Médicos Generales/psicología , Humanos , Neumonía/diagnóstico , Atención Primaria de Salud , Encuestas y Cuestionarios
10.
Br J Gen Pract ; 68(669): e268-e278, 2018 04.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29483078

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of using point-of-care (POC) urine culture in primary care on appropriate antibiotic use is unknown. AIM: To assess whether use of the Flexicult™ SSI-Urinary Kit, which quantifies bacterial growth and determines antibiotic susceptibility at the point of care, achieves antibiotic use that is more often concordant with laboratory culture results, when compared with standard care. DESIGN AND SETTING: Individually randomised trial of females with uncomplicated urinary tract infection (UTI) in primary care research networks (PCRNs) in England, the Netherlands, Spain, and Wales. METHOD: Multilevel regression compared outcomes between the two groups while controlling for clustering. RESULTS: In total, 329 participants were randomised to POC testing (POCT) and 325 to standard care, and 324 and 319 analysed. Fewer females randomised to the POCT arm than those who received standard care were prescribed antibiotics at the initial consultation (267/324 [82.4%] versus 282/319 [88.4%], odds ratio [OR] 0.56, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.35 to 0.88). Clinicians indicated the POCT result changed their management for 190/301 (63.1%). Despite this, there was no statistically significant difference between study arms in antibiotic use that was concordant with laboratory culture results (primary outcome) at day 3 (39.3% POCT versus 44.1% standard care, OR 0.84, 95% CI = 0.58 to 1.20), and there was no evidence of any differences in recovery, patient enablement, UTI recurrences, re-consultation, antibiotic resistance, and hospitalisations at follow-up. POCT culture was not cost-effective. CONCLUSION: Point-of-care urine culture was not effective when used mainly to adjust immediate antibiotic prescriptions. Further research should evaluate use of the test to guide initiation of 'delayed antibiotics'.


Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Pruebas en el Punto de Atención , Urinálisis/métodos , Infecciones Urinarias/diagnóstico , Orina/microbiología , Adulto , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Femenino , Humanos , Sistemas de Atención de Punto , Infecciones Urinarias/tratamiento farmacológico
11.
Fam Pract ; 35(4): 461-467, 2018 07 23.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29300965

RESUMEN

Background: The TARGET (Treat Antibiotics Responsibly; Guidance, Education, Tools) Antibiotics Toolkit aims to improve antimicrobial prescribing in primary care through guidance, interactive workshops with action planning, patient facing educational and audit materials. Objective: To explore GPs', nurses' and other stakeholders' views of TARGET. Design: Mixed methods. Method: In 2014, 40 UK GP staff and 13 stakeholders participated in interviews or focus groups. We analysed data using a thematic framework and normalization process theory (NPT). Results: Two hundred and sixty-nine workshop participants completed evaluation forms, and 40 GP staff, 4 trainers and 9 relevant stakeholders participated in interviews (29) or focus groups (24). GP staffs were aware of the issues around antimicrobial resistance (AMR) and how it related to their prescribing. Most participants stated that TARGET as a whole was useful. Participants suggested the workshop needed less background on AMR, be centred around clinical cases and allow more action planning time. Participants particularly valued comparison of their practice antibiotic prescribing with others and the TARGET Treating Your Infection leaflet. The leaflet needed greater accessibility via GP computer systems. Due to time, cost, accessibility and competing priorities, many GP staff had not fully utilized all resources, especially the audit and educational materials. Conclusions: We found evidence that the workshop is likely to be more acceptable and engaging if based around clinical scenarios, with less on AMR and more time on action planning. Greater promotion of TARGET, through Clinical Commissioning Group's (CCG's) and professional bodies, may improve uptake. Patient facing resources should be made accessible through computer shortcuts built into general practice software.


Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Programas de Optimización del Uso de los Antimicrobianos/métodos , Actitud del Personal de Salud , Personal de Salud/educación , Atención Primaria de Salud , Grupos Focales , Promoción de la Salud , Humanos , Entrevistas como Asunto , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina , Investigación Cualitativa
12.
Health Expect ; 21(1): 387-395, 2018 02.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28960624

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Pandemics of new and emerging infectious diseases are unpredictable, recurrent events that rapidly threaten global health and security. We aimed to identify public views regarding provision of information and consent to participate in primary and critical care clinical research during a future influenza-like illness pandemic. METHODS: Descriptive-interpretive qualitative study, using focus groups (n = 10) and semi-structured interviews (n = 16), with 80 members of the public (>18 years) in Belgium, Spain, Poland and the UK. Local qualitative researchers followed a scenario-based topic guide to collect data. Data were transcribed verbatim, translated into English and subject to framework analysis. RESULTS: Public understandings of pandemics were shaped by personal factors (illness during the previous H1N1 pandemic, experience of life-threatening illness) and social factors (historical references, media, public health information). Informants appreciated safeguards provided by ethically robust research procedures, but current enrolment procedures were seen as a barrier. They proposed simplified enrolment processes for higher risk research and consent waiver for certain types of low-risk research. Decision making about research participation was influenced by contextual, research and personal factors. Informants generally either carefully weighed up various approaches to research participation or responded instinctively. They supported the principle of using routinely collected, anonymized clinical biological samples for research without explicit consent, but regarded this as less acceptable if researchers were motivated primarily by commercial gain. CONCLUSIONS: This bottom-up approach to ascertaining public views on pandemic clinical research has identified support for more proportionate research protection procedures for publically funded, low-risk studies.


Asunto(s)
Investigación Biomédica , Participación de la Comunidad , Brotes de Enfermedades , Pandemias/prevención & control , Participación del Paciente , Adulto , Anciano , Europa (Continente) , Femenino , Grupos Focales , Humanos , Consentimiento Informado , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Investigación Cualitativa
13.
Br J Gen Pract ; 67(665): e830-e841, 2017 Dec.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29158245

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Regional variations in the presentation of uncomplicated urinary tract infection (UTI) and pathogen sensitivity to antibiotics have been cited as reasons to justify differences in how the infections are managed, which includes the prescription of broad-spectrum antibiotics. AIM: To describe presentation and management of UTI in primary care settings, and explore the association with patient recovery, taking microbiological findings and case mix into account. DESIGN AND SETTING: Prospective observational study of females with symptoms of uncomplicated UTI presenting to primary care networks in England, Wales, the Netherlands, and Spain. METHOD: Clinicians recorded history, symptom severity, management, and requested mid-stream urine culture. Participants recorded, in a diary, symptom severity each day for 14 days. Time to recovery was compared between patient characteristics and between countries using two-level Cox proportional hazards models, with patients nested within practices. RESULTS: In total, 797 females attending primary care networks in England (n = 246, 30.9% of cohort), Wales (n = 213, 26.7%), the Netherlands (n = 133, 16.7%), and Spain (n = 205, 25.7%) were included. In total, 259 (35.8%, 95% confidence interval 32.3 to 39.2) of 726 females for whom there was a result were urine culture positive for UTI. Pathogens and antibiotic sensitivities were similar. Empirical antibiotics were prescribed for 95.1% in England, 92.9% in Wales, 95.1% in Spain, and 59.4% in the Netherlands There were no meaningful differences at a country network level before and after controlling for severity, prior UTIs, and antibiotic prescribing. CONCLUSION: Variation in presentation and management of uncomplicated UTI at a country primary care network level is clinically unwarranted and highlights a lack of consensus concerning optimal symptom control and antibiotic prescribing.


Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/estadística & datos numéricos , Atención Primaria de Salud , Derivación y Consulta/estadística & datos numéricos , Urinálisis/métodos , Infecciones Urinarias/diagnóstico , Infecciones Urinarias/tratamiento farmacológico , Adulto , Análisis de Varianza , Inglaterra , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Países Bajos , Estudios Prospectivos , España , Resultado del Tratamiento , Infecciones Urinarias/epidemiología , Gales
14.
Trials ; 18(1): 442, 2017 Sep 29.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28969667

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Most patients presenting with acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) in primary care are prescribed an antibiotic, which may not always be appropriate and may cause harm. C-reactive protein (CRP) is an acute-phase biomarker that can be rapidly measured at the point of care and may predict benefit from antibiotic treatment in AECOPD. It is not clear whether the addition of a CRP point-of-care test (POCT) to clinical assessment leads to a reduction in antibiotic consumption without having a negative impact on COPD health status. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a multicentre, individually randomised controlled trial (RCT) aiming to include 650 participants with a diagnosis of AECOPD in primary care. Participants will be randomised to be managed according to usual care (control) or with the addition of a CRP POCT to guide antibiotic prescribing. Antibiotic consumption for AECOPD within 4 weeks post randomisation and COPD health status (total score) measured by the Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ) at 2 weeks post randomisation will be co-primary outcomes. Primary analysis (by intention-to-treat) will determine differences in antibiotic consumption for superiority and COPD health status for non-inferiority. Secondary outcomes include: COPD health status, CCQ domain scores, use of other COPD treatments (weeks 1, 2 and 4), EQ-5D utility scores (weeks 1, 2 and 4 and month 6), disease-specific, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) at 6 months, all-cause antibiotic consumption (antibiotic use for any condition) during first 4 weeks post randomisation, total antibiotic consumption (number of days during first 4 weeks of antibiotic consumed for AECOPD/any reason), antibiotic prescribing at the index consultation and during following 4 weeks, adverse effects over the first 4 weeks, incidence of pneumonia (weeks 4 and 6 months), health care resource use and cost comparison over the 6 months following randomisation. Prevalence and resistance profiles of bacteria will be assessed using throat and sputum samples collected at baseline and 4-week follow-up. A health economic evaluation and qualitative process evaluation will be carried out. DISCUSSION: If shown to be effective (i.e. leads to a reduction in antibiotic use with no worse COPD health status), the use of the CRP POCT could lead to better outcomes for patients with AECOPD and help reduce selective pressures driving the development of antimicrobial resistance. PACE will be one of the first studies to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a POCT biomarker to guide clinical decision-making in primary care on patient-reported outcomes, antibiotic prescribing and antibiotic resistance for AECOPD. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN registry, ID: ISRCTN24346473 . Registered on 20 August 2014.


Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Proteína C-Reactiva/análisis , Medicina General/métodos , Médicos Generales , Pruebas en el Punto de Atención , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/tratamiento farmacológico , Antibacterianos/efectos adversos , Antibacterianos/economía , Biomarcadores/sangre , Toma de Decisiones Clínicas , Protocolos Clínicos , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Progresión de la Enfermedad , Costos de los Medicamentos , Prescripciones de Medicamentos , Medicina General/economía , Médicos Generales/economía , Conocimientos, Actitudes y Práctica en Salud , Estado de Salud , Humanos , Análisis de Intención de Tratar , Pruebas en el Punto de Atención/economía , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/economía , Valor Predictivo de las Pruebas , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/sangre , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/diagnóstico , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/microbiología , Calidad de Vida , Proyectos de Investigación , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento , Reino Unido
15.
BMJ Open ; 7(5): e015308, 2017 06 06.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28592579

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: To understand attitudes and behaviours of adolescents towards antibiotics, antimicrobial resistance and respiratory tract infections. DESIGN: Qualitative approach informed by the Theory of Planned Behaviour. Semi-structured interviews and focus groups were undertaken. We aimed to inform the development of an intervention in an international setting to improve antibiotic use among adolescents; therefore on completion of thematic analysis, findings were triangulated with qualitative data from similar studies in France, Saudi Arabia and Cyprus to elucidate differences in the behaviour change model and adaptation to diverse contexts. SETTING: 7 educational establishments from the south of England. PARTICIPANTS: 53 adolescents (16-18 years) participated in seven focus groups and 21 participated in interviews. RESULTS: Most participants had taken antibiotics and likened them to other common medications such as painkillers; they reported that their peers treat antibiotics like a 'cure-all' and that they themselves were not interested in antibiotics as a discussion topic. They demonstrated low knowledge of the difference between viral and bacterial infections.Participants self-cared for colds and flu but believed antibiotics are required to treat other RTIs such as tonsillitis, which they perceived as more 'serious'. Past history of taking antibiotics for RTIs instilled the belief that antibiotics were required for future RTIs. Those who characterised themselves as 'non-science students' were less informed about antibiotics and AMR. Most participants felt that AMR was irrelevant to them and their peers. Some 'non-science' students thought resistance was a property of the body, rather than bacteria. CONCLUSION: Addressing adolescents' misperceptions about antibiotics and the treatment of RTIs using a behaviour change intervention should help improve antibiotic awareness and may break the cycle of patient demand for antibiotics to treat RTIs amongst this group. Schools should consider educating all students in further education about antibiotic usage and AMR, not only those taking science.


Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Conocimientos, Actitudes y Práctica en Salud , Infecciones del Sistema Respiratorio/tratamiento farmacológico , Infecciones del Sistema Respiratorio/microbiología , Autocuidado , Adolescente , Conducta del Adolescente , Farmacorresistencia Microbiana , Inglaterra , Femenino , Grupos Focales , Humanos , Entrevistas como Asunto , Masculino , Investigación Cualitativa , Instituciones Académicas , Estudiantes
16.
Fam Pract ; 34(4): 392-399, 2017 08 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28334777

RESUMEN

Background: Urine culture at the point of care minimises delay between obtaining the sample and agar inoculation in a microbiology laboratory, and quantification and sensitivity results can be available more rapidly in primary care. Objective: To identify the degree to which clinicians' interpretations of a point-of-care-test (POCT) urine culture (Flexicult™ SSI-Urinary Kit) agrees with laboratory culture in women presenting to primary care with symptoms of uncomplicated urinary tract infections (UTI). Methods: Primary care clinicians used the Flexicult™-POCT, recorded their findings and took a photograph of the result, which was interpreted by microbiology laboratory technicians. Urine samples were additionally processed in routine care laboratories. Cross tabulations were used to identify important differences in organism identification, quantification and antibiotic susceptibility between these three sources of data. The influence of various laboratory definitions for UTI on culture were assessed. Results: Primary care clinicians identified 202/289 urine samples (69.9%) as positive for UTI using the Flexicult™-POCT, whereas laboratory culture identified 94-190 (32.5-65.7%) as positive, depending on definition thresholds. 82.9% of samples identified positive for E. coli on laboratory culture were also considered positive for E. coli using the Flexicult™ -POCT, and susceptibilities were reasonably concordant. There were major discrepancies between laboratory staff interpretation of Flexicult™ photographs, clinicians' interpretation of the Flexicult™ test, and laboratory culture results. Conclusion: Flexicult™-POCT overestimated the positivity rate of urine samples for UTI when laboratory culture was used as the reference standard. However, it is unclear whether point-of-care or laboratory based urine culture provides the most valid diagnostic information.


Asunto(s)
Sistemas de Atención de Punto/estadística & datos numéricos , Atención Primaria de Salud , Urinálisis , Infecciones Urinarias/diagnóstico , Adulto , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Escherichia coli/patogenicidad , Femenino , Humanos , Pruebas de Sensibilidad Microbiana , Países Bajos , España , Reino Unido , Urinálisis/métodos , Urinálisis/normas , Infecciones Urinarias/tratamiento farmacológico
17.
Trials ; 17(1): 115, 2016 Mar 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26931619

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Otitis media with effusion (OME) is an accumulation of fluid in the middle ear affecting about 80 % of children by the age of 4 years. While OME usually resolves spontaneously, it can affect speech, behaviour and development. Children with persistent hearing loss associated with OME are usually offered hearing aids or insertion of ventilation tubes through the tympanic membrane. Oral steroids may be a safe and effective treatment for OME, which could be delivered in primary care. Treatment with oral steroids has the potential to benefit large numbers of children and reduce the burden of care on them and on health services. However, previous trials have either been too small with too short a follow-up period, or of too poor quality to give a definite answer. The aim of the Oral Steroids for the Resolution of Otitis Media with Effusion in Children (OSTRICH) trial is to determine if a short course of oral steroids improves the hearing of children with OME in the short and longer term. METHODS/DESIGN: A total of 380 participants (children of 2 to 8 years of age) are recruited from Hospital Ear, Nose and Throat departments in Wales and England. A trained clinician seeks informed consent from parents of children with symptoms for at least 3 months that are attributable to OME and with confirmed bilateral hearing loss at study entry. Participants are randomised to a course of oral steroid or a matched placebo for 1 week. Outcomes include audiometry, tympanometry and otoscopy assessments; symptoms; adverse effects; functional health status; quality of life; resource use; and cost effectiveness. Participants are followed up at 5 weeks, and at 6 and 12 months after the day of randomisation. The primary outcome is audiometry-confirmed satisfactory hearing at 5 weeks. DISCUSSION: An important evidence gap exists regarding the clinical and cost effectiveness of short courses of oral steroid treatment for OME. Identifying an effective, safe, nonsurgical intervention for OME in children for use in primary care would be of great benefit to children, their families and the NHS. ISRCTN: ISRCTN49798431 (Registered 7 December 2012).


Asunto(s)
Glucocorticoides/administración & dosificación , Pérdida Auditiva Bilateral/tratamiento farmacológico , Audición/efectos de los fármacos , Otitis Media con Derrame/tratamiento farmacológico , Prednisolona/administración & dosificación , Administración Oral , Factores de Edad , Niño , Preescolar , Protocolos Clínicos , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Costos de los Medicamentos , Femenino , Glucocorticoides/efectos adversos , Glucocorticoides/economía , Pérdida Auditiva Bilateral/economía , Pérdida Auditiva Bilateral/etiología , Pérdida Auditiva Bilateral/fisiopatología , Pruebas Auditivas , Humanos , Masculino , Otitis Media con Derrame/complicaciones , Otitis Media con Derrame/economía , Otitis Media con Derrame/fisiopatología , Prednisolona/efectos adversos , Prednisolona/economía , Calidad de Vida , Recuperación de la Función , Proyectos de Investigación , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento , Reino Unido
18.
Trials ; 16: 591, 2015 Dec 29.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26715077

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: A rigorous research response is required to inform clinical and public health decision-making during an epi/pandemic. However, the ethical conduct of such research, which often involves critically ill patients, may be complicated by the diminished capacity to consent and an imperative to initiate trial therapies within short time frames. Alternative approaches to taking prospective informed consent may therefore be used. We aimed to rapidly review evidence on key stakeholder (patients, their proxy decision-makers, clinicians and regulators) views concerning the acceptability of various approaches for obtaining consent relevant to pandemic-related acute illness research. METHODS: We conducted a rapid evidence review, using the Internet, database and hand-searching for English language empirical publications from 1996 to 2014 on stakeholder opinions of consent models (prospective informed, third-party, deferred, or waived) used in acute illness research. We excluded research on consent to treatment, screening, or other such procedures, non-emergency research and secondary studies. Papers were categorised, and data summarised using narrative synthesis. RESULTS: We screened 689 citations, reviewed 104 full-text articles and included 52. Just one paper related specifically to pandemic research. In other emergency research contexts potential research participants, clinicians and research staff found third-party, deferred, and waived consent to be acceptable as a means to feasibly conduct such research. Acceptability to potential participants was motivated by altruism, trust in the medical community, and perceived value in medical research and decreased as the perceived risks associated with participation increased. Discrepancies were observed in the acceptability of the concept and application or experience of alternative consent models. Patients accepted clinicians acting as proxy-decision makers, with preference for two decision makers as invasiveness of interventions increased. Research regulators were more cautious when approving studies conducted with alternative consent models; however, their views were generally under-represented. CONCLUSIONS: Third-party, deferred, and waived consent models are broadly acceptable to potential participants, clinicians and/or researchers for emergency research. Further consultation with key stakeholders, particularly with regulators, and studies focused specifically on epi/pandemic research, are required. We highlight gaps and recommendations to inform set-up and protocol development for pandemic research and institutional review board processes. PROSPERO PROTOCOL REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42014014000.


Asunto(s)
Actitud del Personal de Salud , Ensayos Clínicos como Asunto/psicología , Epidemias , Consentimiento Informado/psicología , Pandemias , Selección de Paciente , Percepción , Investigadores/psicología , Sujetos de Investigación/psicología , Ensayos Clínicos como Asunto/ética , Comprensión , Enfermedad Crítica , Conocimientos, Actitudes y Práctica en Salud , Humanos , Consentimiento Informado/ética , Prioridad del Paciente , Selección de Paciente/ética , Apoderado , Investigadores/ética , Consentimiento por Terceros/ética
19.
BMC Fam Pract ; 15: 187, 2014 Nov 25.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25425162

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Urinary tract infections (UTI) are the most frequent bacterial infection affecting women and account for about 15% of antibiotics prescribed in primary care. However, some women with a UTI are not prescribed antibiotics or are prescribed the wrong antibiotics, while many women who do not have a microbiologically confirmed UTI are prescribed antibiotics. Inappropriate antibiotic prescribing unnecessarily increases the risk of side effects and the development of antibiotic resistance, and wastes resources. METHODS/DESIGN: 614 adult female patients will be recruited from four primary care research networks (Wales, England, Spain, the Netherlands) and individually randomised to either POCT guided care or the guideline-informed 'standard care' arm. Urine and stool samples (where possible) will be obtained at presentation (day 1) and two weeks later for microbiological analysis. All participants will be followed up on the course of their illness and their quality of life, using a 2 week self-completed symptom diary. At 3 months, a primary care notes review will be conducted for evidence of further evidence of treatment failures, recurrence, complications, hospitalisations and health service costs. DISCUSSION: Although the Flexicult™ POCT is used in some countries in routine primary care, it's clinical and cost effectiveness has never been evaluated in a randomised clinical trial. If shown to be effective, the use of this POCT could benefit individual sufferers and provide evidence for health care authorities to develop evidence based policies to combat the spread and impact of the unprecedented rise of infections caused by antibiotic resistant bacteria in Europe. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN65200697 (Registered 10 September 2013).


Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Sistemas de Atención de Punto , Atención Primaria de Salud , Infecciones Urinarias/diagnóstico , Orina/microbiología , Adulto , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Técnicas de Cultivo , Manejo de la Enfermedad , Femenino , Humanos , Pruebas de Sensibilidad Microbiana , Resultado del Tratamiento , Infecciones Urinarias/tratamiento farmacológico
20.
BMC Infect Dis ; 12: 158, 2012 Jul 19.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22812651

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Urinary tract infection (UTI) is common in children, and may cause serious illness and recurrent symptoms. However, obtaining a urine sample from young children in primary care is challenging and not feasible for large numbers. Evidence regarding the predictive value of symptoms, signs and urinalysis for UTI in young children is urgently needed to help primary care clinicians better identify children who should be investigated for UTI. This paper describes the protocol for the Diagnosis of Urinary Tract infection in Young children (DUTY) study. The overall study aim is to derive and validate a cost-effective clinical algorithm for the diagnosis of UTI in children presenting to primary care acutely unwell. METHODS/DESIGN: DUTY is a multicentre, diagnostic and prospective observational study aiming to recruit at least 7,000 children aged before their fifth birthday, being assessed in primary care for any acute, non-traumatic, illness of ≤ 28 days duration. Urine samples will be obtained from eligible consented children, and data collected on medical history and presenting symptoms and signs. Urine samples will be dipstick tested in general practice and sent for microbiological analysis. All children with culture positive urines and a random sample of children with urine culture results in other, non-positive categories will be followed up to record symptom duration and healthcare resource use. A diagnostic algorithm will be constructed and validated and an economic evaluation conducted.The primary outcome will be a validated diagnostic algorithm using a reference standard of a pure/predominant growth of at least >103, but usually >105 CFU/mL of one, but no more than two uropathogens.We will use logistic regression to identify the clinical predictors (i.e. demographic, medical history, presenting signs and symptoms and urine dipstick analysis results) most strongly associated with a positive urine culture result. We will then use economic evaluation to compare the cost effectiveness of the candidate prediction rules. DISCUSSION: This study will provide novel, clinically important information on the diagnostic features of childhood UTI and the cost effectiveness of a validated prediction rule, to help primary care clinicians improve the efficiency of their diagnostic strategy for UTI in young children.


Asunto(s)
Infecciones Urinarias/diagnóstico , Preescolar , Femenino , Humanos , Lactante , Recién Nacido , Modelos Logísticos , Masculino , Sistemas de Atención de Punto , Atención Primaria de Salud , Estudios Prospectivos
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...