Protocol for a randomised crossover trial to evaluate patient and nurse satisfaction with electronic and elastomeric portable infusion pumps for the continuous administration of antibiotic therapy in the home: the Comparing Home Infusion Devices (CHID) study

This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/Introduction Previous studies comparing satisfaction with electronic and elastomeric infusion pumps are limited, and improvements in size and usability of electronic pumps have since occurred. The Comparing Home Infusion Devices (CHID) study plans to assess patient and nurse satisfaction with an elastomeric and electronic pump for delivering intravenous antibiotic treatment in the home. Secondary objectives are to determine pump-related complications and actual antibiotic dose administered, evaluate temperature variation and compare pump operating costs. Methods and analysis The CHID study will be a randomised, crossover trial. A trained research nurse will recruit patients with infectious disease aged ≥18 years and prescribed ≥8 days of continuous intravenous antibiotic therapy from the Royal Adelaide Hospital (RAH) (Adelaide, Australia). Patients will be randomised to receive treatment at home via an elastomeric (Baxter Infusor) or an electronic (ambIT Continuous) infusion pump for 4–7 days, followed by the other for a further 4–7 days. Patient satisfaction will be assessed by a 10-item survey to be completed at the end of each arm. Nurse satisfaction will be assessed by a single 24-item survey. Patient logbooks and case notes from clinic visits will be screened to identify complications. Pumps/infusion bags will be weighed to estimate the volume of solution delivered. Temperature sensors will record skin and ambient temperatures during storage and use of the pumps throughout the infusion period. Costs relating to pumps, consumables, antibiotics and servicing will be determined. Descriptive statistics will summarise study data

Point of care testing for hepatitis C in the priority settings of mental health, prisons and drug & alcohol facilities – the PROMPt Study

BackgroundA barrier to hepatitis C virus (HCV) cure is conventional testing. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of HCV antibody and RNA point-of-care-testing (POCT) on testing rates, linkage to care, treatment and acceptability of testing in three priority settings in Australia.MethodsParticipants were enrolled in an interventional cohort study at a reception prison, inpatient mental health service (MHS), and inpatient alcohol and other drug (AOD) unit—between October 2020 and December 2021. HCV POCT was performed using SD Bioline HCV antibody fingerstick test and a reflexive Xpert® HCV Viral Load Fingerstick test using capillary blood samples. A retrospective audit of HCV testing and treatment data was performed at each site for the preceding 12-month period to generate a historical control.Results1,549 participants received a HCV antibody test with 17% (264/1,549) receiving a positive result, of which 21% (55/264) tested HCV RNA positive. Across all settings the rate of testing per year significantly increased between the historical controls and the study intervention period by three-fold (RR:2.57 95% CI: 2.32, 2.85) for HCV antibody testing and four-fold (RR:1.62; 95% CI:1.31, 2.01) for RNA testing. Treatment uptake was higher during the POCT intervention (86%, 47/55; P=0.010) compared to the historical controls (61%, 27/44).ConclusionsThis study demonstrated across three settings that the use of HCV antibody and RNA POCT increased testing rates, treatment uptake linkage to care. The testing model was highly acceptable for most participants