Trial reportCritical care (London, England)2025
Cost-effectiveness of rapid, ICU-based, syndromic PCR in hospital-acquired pneumonia: analysis of the INHALE WP3 multi-centre RCT.
Trial report in Critical care (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Scenario-Driven Rapid Testing for Top Pathogens in Pediatric Respiratory Infections: Clinical and Economic Value from Emergency Triage to Precision Anti-Infective Management in the PICU.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Evaluating the Impact of Filmarray Pneumonia Plus Panel in Therapeutic Decision-Making in Critical Patients with Suspected Respiratory Infection.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Challenges and opportunities in the management of severe pneumonia. Key concepts from the Seventh Annual Meeting of Spanish Experts 2025.Revista espanola de quimioterapia : publicacion oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Quimioterapia · 2026Review
- Rapid Diagnostic Testing in Bloodstream Infections: A Retrospective Clinical and Economic Evaluation from a University Hospital in Bulgaria.Microorganisms · 2026Article
- Integrating Syndromic Molecular Assays into Routine Diagnostic Microbiology: Benefits and Challenges.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Rapid Molecular Diagnostics of Tuberculosis: What Do We Have, What Do We Need?Pulmonary medicine · 2026Review
- RAPID-CARE: Rapid Antibiotic Optimization in the ICU After Implementation of a Pneumonia Multiplex PCR Test-A Real-World Evaluation.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Correction: Cost-effectiveness of rapid, ICU-based, syndromic PCR in hospital-acquired pneumonia: analysis of the INHALE WP3 multi-centre RCT.Critical care (London, England) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHospital-acquired and ventilator-associated pneumonia (HAP and VAP) are pneumonias arising > 48 h after admission or intubation respectively. Conventionally, HAP/VAP patients are given broad-spectrum empiric antibiotics at clinical diagnosis, refined after 48-72 h, once microbiology results become available. Molecular tests offer swifter results, potentially improving patient care. To investigate whether this potential is realisable, we conducted a pragmatic multi-centre RCT ('INHALE WP3') of rapid, syndromic polymerase chain reaction (PCR) in ICU HAP/VAP compared with standard of care. As the use of molecular tests impact on hospital resources, it is important to consider their potential value-for-money to make fully informed decisions. Consequently, INHALE WP3 included an economic evaluation, presented here. Its aim was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of an in-ICU PCR (bioMérieux BioFire FilmArray Pneumonia Panel) in HAP/VAP, informing whether to implement such technology in routine NHS care.
methodsWe collected data on patient resource use and costs. These data were combined with INHALE WP3's two primary outcome measures: antibiotic stewardship at 24 h and clinical cure at 14 days. Cost-effectiveness analyses were carried out using regression models adjusting for site. Sensitivity analyses explored assumptions and sub-group analyses explored differential impacts.
resultsWe found lower total ICU costs (including PCR costs) in the intervention (PCR-guided therapy) group. Average costs were £40,951 for standard of care compared with £33,149 for the intervention group, a difference of - £7,802 (95% CI: - £15,696, £92). For antibiotic stewardship, the PCR-guided therapy was both less costly and more effective than routine patient management. For clinical cure, we did not find PCR-guided therapy to be cost-effective due to fewer cases being cured in the intervention group.
conclusionsWe found lower average ICU costs with the Pneumonia Panel. The pneumonia panel was cost-effective in terms of antibiotic stewardship, but not clinical cure.
trial registrationRegistered as ISRCTN16483855 on 5th August 2019.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.