Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27625060›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2016

Study protocol for a randomised controlled trial of invasive versus conservative management of primary spontaneous pneumothorax.

Simon G A Brown, Emma L Ball, Kyle Perrin, Catherine A Read, Stephen E Asha, Richard Beasley, Diana Egerton-Warburton, Peter G Jones, Gerben Keijzers, Frances B Kinnear and 6 more

Open access · goldAbstract readEquivalence TrialMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
5.1field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. An evidence-based review of primary spontaneous pneumothorax in the adolescent population.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2021
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors at 13 institutions in 2 countries.

Simon G A BrownCentre for Clinical Research in Emergency Medicine, Harry Perkins Institute of Medical Research, University of Western Australia, Perth, Western Australia, Australia Emergency Department, Royal Perth Hospital, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.
Emma L BallCentre for Clinical Research in Emergency Medicine, Harry Perkins Institute of Medical Research, University of Western Australia, Perth, Western Australia, Australia Department of Respiratory Medicine, Royal Perth Hospital, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.
Kyle PerrinMedical Research Institute of New Zealand, Wellington, New Zealand Capital and Coast District Health Board, Wellington, New Zealand.
Catherine A ReadCentre for Clinical Research in Emergency Medicine, Harry Perkins Institute of Medical Research, University of Western Australia, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.
Stephen E AshaEmergency Department, St George Hospital, Kogarah, New South Wales, Australia Faculty of Medicine, St George Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Kensington, New South Wales, Australia.
Richard BeasleyMedical Research Institute of New Zealand, Wellington, New Zealand Capital and Coast District Health Board, Wellington, New Zealand.
Diana Egerton-WarburtonEmergency Department, Monash Medical Centre, Clayton, Victoria, Australia Department of Medicine, School of Clinical Sciences at Monash Health, Clayton, Victoria, Australia.
Peter G JonesAdult Emergency Department, Auckland District Health Board, Auckland, New Zealand.
Gerben KeijzersEmergency Medicine, Gold Coast Health Service District, Southport, Queensland, Australia School of Medicine, Bond University, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia School of Medicine, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia.
Frances B KinnearEmergency Medical and Children's Services, The Prince Charles Hospital, Chermside, Queensland, Australia University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Ben C H KwanDepartment of Respiratory and Sleep Medicine, The Sutherland Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia Department of Respiratory Medicine, St George Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Y C Gary LeeRespiratory Medicine, Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital, Perth, Western Australia, Australia Centre for Respiratory Health, School of Medicine & Pharmacology, University of Western Australia, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.
Julian A SmithDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Monash Health, Clayton, Victoria, Australia Department of Surgery, School of Clinical Sciences at Monash Health, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia.
Quentin A SummersRespiratory Department, Royal Perth Hospital, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.
Graham SimpsonDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, The Cairns Hospital, Cairns, Queensland, Australia.
PSP Study Group
Harry Perkins Institute of Medical Research · AUUniversity of Western Australia · AUAuckland District Health Board · NZCairns Hospital · AUCapital and Coast District Health Board · NZGriffith University · AUMedical Research Institute of New Zealand · NZMonash Medical Centre · AUMonash University · AUPrince Charles Hospital · AURoyal Perth Hospital · AUSt George Hospital · AUUNSW Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionCurrent management of primary spontaneous pneumothorax (PSP) is variable, with little evidence from randomised controlled trials to guide treatment. Guidelines emphasise intervention in many patients, which involves chest drain insertion, hospital admission and occasionally surgery. However, there is evidence that conservative management may be effective and safe, and it may also reduce the risk of recurrence. Significant questions remain regarding the optimal initial approach to the management of PSP. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This multicentre, prospective, randomised, open label, parallel group, non-inferiority study will randomise 342 participants with a first large PSP to conservative or interventional management. To maintain allocation concealment, randomisation will be performed in real time by computer and stratified by study site. Conservative management will involve a period of observation prior to discharge, with intervention for worsening symptoms or physiological instability. Interventional treatment will involve insertion of a small bore drain. If drainage continues after 1 hour, the patient will be admitted. If drainage stops, the drain will be clamped for 4 hours. The patient will be discharged if the lung remains inflated. Otherwise, the patient will be admitted. The primary end point is the proportion of participants with complete lung re-expansion by 8 weeks. Secondary end points are as follows: days in hospital, persistent air leak, predefined complications and adverse events, time to resolution of symptoms, and pneumothorax recurrence during a follow-up period of at least 1 year. The study has 95% power to detect an absolute non-inferiority margin of 9%, assuming 99% successful expansion at 8 weeks in the invasive treatment arm. The primary analysis will be by intention to treat. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Local ethics approval has been obtained for all sites. Study findings will be disseminated by publication in a high-impact international journal and presentation at major international Emergency Medicine and Respiratory meetings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12611000184976; Pre-results.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAustraliaChest TubesConservative TreatmentDrainageEmergency Service, HospitalFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHospitalizationHumansLength of StayMaleNew ZealandPneumothoraxPostoperative ComplicationsACCIDENT & EMERGENCY MEDICINE

Identifiers

PMID27625060
PMCPMC5030537
OpenAlexW2519182157

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.