Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35523502›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2022

LOw-dose CT Or Lung UltraSonography versus standard of care based-strategies for the diagnosis of pneumonia in the elderly: protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial (OCTOPLUS).

Virginie Prendki, Nicolas Garin, Jerome Stirnemann, Christophe Combescure, Alexandra Platon, Enos Bernasconi, Thomas Sauter, Wolf Hautz, OCTOPLUS study group

Registry-linked trialAbstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04978116 (Low-dose CT Compared to Lung Ultrasonography vs Standard of Care for the Diagnosis of Pneumonia in the Elderly), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT04978116 nacompletednot on this map

Low-dose CT Compared to Lung Ultrasonography vs Standard of Care for the Diagnosis of Pneumonia in the Elderly: a Multicentre Randomized Controlled Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity Hospital, GenevaRan2021 to 2025Enrolled473ConditionsPneumonia, Elderly InfectionArmsChest X-Ray (CXR), Low-dose CT scan (LDCT), Lung ultrasonography (LUS)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. 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

9 authors.

Virginie PrendkiDivision of Internal Medicine for the Aged, Geneva University Hospitals, Thônex, Switzerland virginie.prendki@hcuge.ch.ORCID 0000-0003-1315-2938
Nicolas GarinDivision of General Internal Medicine, Riviera Chablais Hospitals, Rennaz, Switzerland.
Jerome StirnemannDepartment of Internal Medicine Specialties, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland.
Christophe CombescureDepartment of Health and Community Medicine, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneve, Switzerland.
Alexandra PlatonDiagnostic Department, Division of Radiology, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland.
Enos BernasconiDivision of Infectious Diseases, Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale, University of Southern Switzerland, Lugano, Switzerland.
Thomas SauterDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Inselspital University Hospital Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Wolf HautzDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Inselspital University Hospital Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
OCTOPLUS study group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionPneumonia is a leading cause of mortality and a common indication for antibiotic in elderly patients. However, its diagnosis is often inaccurate. We aim to compare the diagnostic accuracy, the clinical and cost outcomes and the use of antibiotics associated with three imaging strategies in patients >65 years old with suspected pneumonia in the emergency room (ER): chest X-ray (CXR, standard of care), low-dose CT scan (LDCT) or lung ultrasonography (LUS). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a multicentre randomised superiority clinical trial with three parallel arms. Patients will be allocated in the ER to a diagnostic strategy based on either CXR, LDCT or LUS. All three imaging modalities will be performed but the results of two of them will be masked during 5 days to the patients, the physicians in charge of the patients and the investigators according to random allocation. The primary objective is to compare the accuracy of LDCT versus CXR-based strategies. As secondary objectives, antibiotics prescription, clinical and cost outcomes will be compared, and the same analyses repeated to compare the LUS and CXR strategies. The reference diagnosis will be established a posteriori by a panel of experts. Based on a previous study, we expect an improvement of 16% of the accuracy of pneumonia diagnosis using LDCT instead of CXR. Under this assumption, and accounting for 10% of drop-out, the enrolment of 495 patients is needed to prove the superiority of LDCT over CRX (alpha error=0.05, beta error=0.10). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval: CER Geneva 2019-01288. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04978116.

Indexed as

PneumoniaStandard of CareAgedAnti-Bacterial AgentsEquivalence Trials as TopicHumansLungMulticenter Studies as TopicRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTomography, X-Ray ComputedUltrasonographyAnti-Bacterial AgentsGERIATRIC MEDICINERespiratory infectionsThoracic medicine

Identifiers

PMID35523502
PMCPMC9083386

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.