↓ Skip to main content

General practitioner use of a C-reactive protein point-of-care test to help target antibiotic prescribing in patients with acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (the PACE study)…

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
197 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
General practitioner use of a C-reactive protein point-of-care test to help target antibiotic prescribing in patients with acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (the PACE study): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial
Published in
Trials, September 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13063-017-2144-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Janine Bates, Nick A. Francis, Patrick White, David Gillespie, Emma Thomas-Jones, Rachel Breen, Nigel Kirby, Kerry Hood, Micaela Gal, Rhiannon Phillips, Gurudutt Naik, Jochen Cals, Carl Llor, Hasse Melbye, Mandy Wootton, Evgenia Riga, Ann Cochrane, Robin Howe, Deborah Fitzsimmons, Bernadette Sewell, Mohammed Fasihul Alam, Christopher C. Butler

Abstract

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. 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. 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. ISRCTN registry, ID: ISRCTN24346473 . Registered on 20 August 2014.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 197 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 197 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 38 19%
Researcher 23 12%
Student > Bachelor 23 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 9%
Other 12 6%
Other 23 12%
Unknown 60 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 54 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 21 11%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 9 5%
Social Sciences 8 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 3%
Other 32 16%
Unknown 68 35%