Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36384484›Full record

Trial reportBMC infectious diseases2022

A pragmatic randomized controlled trial of rapid on-site influenza and respiratory syncytial virus PCR testing in paediatric and adult populations.

Helen L Bibby, Lawrence de Koning, Isolde Seiden-Long, Nathan Zelyas, Deirdre L Church, Byron M Berenger

Open access · goldAbstract readPragmatic Clinical TrialRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC infectious diseases, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Helen L BibbyDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Calgary, 3535 Research Rd NW, Calgary, AB, T2L 2K8, Canada.
Lawrence de KoningDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Calgary, 3535 Research Rd NW, Calgary, AB, T2L 2K8, Canada.
Isolde Seiden-LongDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Calgary, 3535 Research Rd NW, Calgary, AB, T2L 2K8, Canada.
Nathan ZelyasAlberta Precision Laboratories, Calgary, AB, Canada.
Deirdre L ChurchDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Calgary, 3535 Research Rd NW, Calgary, AB, T2L 2K8, Canada.
Byron M BerengerDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Calgary, 3535 Research Rd NW, Calgary, AB, T2L 2K8, Canada. Byron.Berenger@ucalgary.ca.
University of Calgary · CAUniversity of Alberta · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRapid/point-of-care respiratory virus nucleic acid tests (NAT) may improve oseltamivir, antibiotic, diagnostic test, and hospital bed utilization. Previous randomized controlled trials (RCT) on this topic have not used standard procedures of an accredited healthcare and laboratory system.

methodsWe conducted a parallel RCT at two hospitals [paediatric = Alberta Children's Hospital (ACH); primarily adult = Peter Lougheed Centre (PLC)]. Patients with a respiratory viral testing order were randomized to testing at either a central accredited laboratory (standard arm) or with a rapid polymerase chain reaction test at an on-site accredited laboratory followed by standard testing [rapid on-site test (ROST) arm] based on day of specimen receipt at the laboratory. Patients and clinicians were blinded to assignment. The primary outcome for ACH was inpatient length of stay (LOS) and for PLC was the proportion of inpatients prescribed oseltamivir.

results706 patient encounters were included at ACH; 322 assigned to ROST (181 inpatients) and 384 to the standard arm (194 inpatients). 422 patient encounters were included at PLC; 200 assigned to ROST (157 inpatients) and 222 to the standard arm (175 inpatients). The rate of oseltamivir prescription and number of doses given was reduced in PLC inpatients negative for influenza in the ROST arm compared to standard arm [mean 14.9% (95% CI 9.87-21.9) vs. 27.5% (21.0-35.2), p = 0.0135; mean 2.85 doses (SEM 2.39-3.32) vs. 4.17 doses (3.85-4.49) p = 0.022, respectively]. ROST also significantly reduced oseltamivir use at ACH, reduced chest radiographs (ACH), and laboratory test ordering (PLC), but not antibiotic prescriptions. ROST also reduced the median turnaround time by > 24 h (ACH and PLC). The LOS at ACH was not significantly different between the ROST and standard arms [median 4.05 days (SEM 1.79-18.2) vs 4.89 days (2.07-22.9), p = 0.062, respectively]. No adverse events were reported.

conclusionsIn a RCT representing implementation of ROST in an accredited laboratory system, we found that a ROST improved oseltamivir utilization and is the first RCT to show reduced ancillary testing in both paediatric and adult populations. A larger study is required to assess reduction in paediatric LOS as ACH was underpowered. These findings help justify the implementation of rapid on-site respiratory virus testing for inpatients. Trial registration ISRCTN, number 10110119, Retrospectively Registered, 01/12/2021.

Indexed as

Influenza, HumanRespiratory Syncytial Virus, HumanRespiratory Tract InfectionsVirusesAdultAnti-Bacterial AgentsChildHumansOseltamivirPolymerase Chain ReactionAnti-Bacterial AgentsOseltamivirAdultsAntiviral utilizationLength of stayPaediatricsPoint-of-careRapid molecular testingRespiratory infectionRespiratory viruses

Identifiers

PMID36384484
PMCPMC9667852
OpenAlexW4309320975

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.