Procalcitonin-Guided Use of Antibiotics for Lower Respiratory Tract Infection

BackgroundThe effect of procalcitonin-guided use of antibiotics on treatment for suspected lower respiratory tract infection is unclear.MethodsIn 14 U.S. hospitals with high adherence to quality measures for the treatment of pneumonia, we provided guidance for clinicians about national clinical practice recommendations for the treatment of lower respiratory tract infections and the interpretation of procalcitonin assays. We then randomly assigned patients who presented to the emergency department with a suspected lower respiratory tract infection and for whom the treating physician was uncertain whether antibiotic therapy was indicated to one of two groups: the procalcitonin group, in which the treating clinicians were provided with real-time initial (and serial, if the patient was hospitalized) procalcitonin assay results and an antibiotic use guideline with graded recommendations based on four tiers of procalcitonin levels, or the usual-care group. We hypothesized that within 30 days after enrollment the total antibiotic-days would be lower - and the percentage of patients with adverse outcomes would not be more than 4.5 percentage points higher - in the procalcitonin group than in the usual-care group.ResultsA total of 1656 patients were included in the final analysis cohort (826 randomly assigned to the procalcitonin group and 830 to the usual-care group), of whom 782 (47.2%) were hospitalized and 984 (59.4%) received antibiotics within 30 days. The treating clinician received procalcitonin assay results for 792 of 826 patients (95.9%) in the procalcitonin group (median time from sample collection to assay result, 77 minutes) and for 18 of 830 patients (2.2%) in the usual-care group. In both groups, the procalcitonin-level tier was associated with the decision to prescribe antibiotics in the emergency department. There was no significant difference between the procalcitonin group and the usual-care group in antibiotic-days (mean, 4.2 and 4.3 days, respectively; difference, -0.05 day; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.6 to 0.5; P=0.87) or the proportion of patients with adverse outcomes (11.7% [96 patients] and 13.1% [109 patients]; difference, -1.5 percentage points; 95% CI, -4.6 to 1.7; P<0.001 for noninferiority) within 30 days.ConclusionsThe provision of procalcitonin assay results, along with instructions on their interpretation, to emergency department and hospital-based clinicians did not result in less use of antibiotics than did usual care among patients with suspected lower respiratory tract infection. (Funded by the National Institute of General Medical Sciences; ProACT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02130986 .)

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of Improving clinicians’ diagnostic and communication skills on antibiotic prescribing appropriateness in patients with acute cough in primary care in CATalonia (the ISAAC-CAT study): study protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial

Background Despite their marginal benefit, about 60% of acute lower respiratory tract infections (ALRTIs) are currently treated with antibiotics in Catalonia. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of a continuous disease-focused intervention (C-reactive protein [CRP]) and an illness-focused intervention (enhancement of communication skills to optimise doctor-patient consultations) on antibiotic prescribing in patients with ALRTIs in Catalan primary care centres. Methods/design A cluster randomised, factorial, controlled trial aimed at including 20 primary care centres (N = 2940 patients) with patients older than 18 years of age presenting for a first consultation with an ALRTI will be included in the study. Primary care centres will be identified on the basis of socioeconomic data and antibiotic consumption. Centres will be randomly assigned according to hierarchical clustering to any of four trial arms: usual care, CRP testing, enhanced communication skills backed up with patient leaflets, or combined interventions. A cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analysis will be performed from the societal and national healthcare system perspectives, and the time horizon of the analysis will be 1 year. Two qualitative studies (pre- and post-clinical trial) aimed to identify the expectations and concerns of patients with ALRTIs and the barriers and facilitators of each intervention arm will be run. Family doctors and nurses assigned to the interventions will participate in a 2-h training workshop before the inception of the trial and will receive a monthly intervention-tailored training module during the year of the trial period. Primary outcomes will be antibiotic use within the first 6 weeks, duration of moderate to severe cough, and the quality-adjusted life-years. Secondary outcomes will be duration of illness and severity of cough measured using a symptom diary, healthcare re-consultations, hospital admissions, and complications. Healthcare costs will be considered and expressed in 2021 euros (year foreseen to finalise the study) of the current year of the analysis. Univariate and multivariate sensitivity analyses will be carried out. Discussion The ISAAC-CAT project will contribute to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of different strategies for more appropriate antibiotic prescribing that are currently out of the scope of the actual clinical guidelines.The research is being funded by a grant from the Fundació La Marató de TV3 (reference no. 201820)

Provider Decisions to Treat Respiratory Illnesses with Antibiotics: Insights from a Randomized Controlled Trial

RATIONALE: Lower respiratory tract illness (LRTI) frequently causes adult hospitalization and antibiotic overuse. Procalcitonin (PCT) treatment algorithms have been used successfully in Europe to safely reduce antibiotic use for LRTI but have not been adopted in the United States. We recently performed a feasibility study for a randomized clinical trial (RCT) of PCT and viral testing to guide therapy for non-pneumonic LRTI. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of the current study was to understand factors influencing PCT algorithm adherence during the RCT and evaluate factors influencing provider antibiotic prescribing practices for LRTI. STUDY DESIGN: From October 2013-April 2014, 300 patients hospitalized at a community teaching hospital with non-pneumonic LRTI were randomized to standard or PCT-guided care with viral PCR testing. Algorithm adherence data was collected and multivariate stepwise logistic regression of clinical variables used to model algorithm compliance. 134 providers were surveyed anonymously before and after the trial to assess knowledge of biomarkers and viral testing and antibiotic prescribing practices. RESULTS: Diagnosis of pneumonia on admission was the only variable significantly associated with non-adherence [7% (adherence) vs. 26% (nonadherence), p = 0.01]. Surveys confirmed possible infiltrate on chest radiograph as important for provider decisions, as were severity of illness, positive sputum culture, abnormal CBC and fever. However, age, patient expectations and medical-legal concerns were also at least somewhat important to prescribing practices. Physician agreement with the importance of viral and PCT testing increased from 42% to 64% (p = 0.007) and 49% to 74% (p = 0.001), respectively, after the study. CONCLUSIONS: Optimal algorithm adherence will be important for definitive PCT intervention trials in the US to determine if PCT guided algorithms result in better outcomes than reliance on traditional clinical variables. Factors influencing treatment decisions such as patient age, presence of fever, patient expectations and medical legal concerns may be amenable to education to improve PCT algorithm compliance for LRTI