Search

BackgroundThere is a lack of evidence regarding post-consultation symptom trajectories for patients with respiratory tract infections (RTIs) and whether patient characteristics can be used to predict illness duration.AimTo describe symptom trajectories in patients with RTIs, and assess baseline characteristics and adverse events associated with trajectories.Design and settingThe study included data about 9103 adults and children from 12 primary care studies.MethodA latent class-informed regression analysis of individual patient data from randomised controlled trials and observational cohort studies was undertaken. Post-consultation symptom trajectory (severity and duration), re-consultation with same or worsening illness, and admission to hospital were assessed.ResultsIn total, 90% of participants recovered from all symptoms by 28 days, regardless of antibiotic prescribing strategy (none, immediate, and delayed antibiotics). For studies of RTI with cough as a dominant symptom (n= 5314), four trajectories were identified: ‘rapid (6 days)’ (90% of participants recovered within 6 days) in 52.0%; ‘intermediate (10 days)’ (28.9%); ‘slow progressive improvement (27 days)’ (12.5%); and ‘slow improvement with initial high symptom burden (27 days)’ (6.6%). For cough, being aged 16–64 years (odds ratio [OR] 2.57, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.72 to 3.85 compared with 10 days) compared with faster recovery (≤10 days). Re-consultations and admissions to hospital for cough were higher in those with slower recovery (ORs: 2.15, 95% CI = 1.78 to 2.60 and 7.42, 95% CI = 3.49 to 15.78, respectively).ConclusionOlder patients presenting with more severe, longer pre-consultation symptoms and chronic lung disease should be advised they are more likely to experience longer post-consultation illness durations, and that recovery rates are similar with and without antibiotics.

Objective To assess whether an easy-to-use multifaceted intervention for children presenting to primary care with respiratory tract infections would reduce antibiotic dispensing, without increasing hospital admissions for respiratory tract infection. Design Two arm randomised controlled trial clustered by general practice, using routine outcome data, with qualitative and economic evaluations. Setting English primary care practices using the EMIS electronic medical record system. Participants Children aged 0-9 years presenting with respiratory tract infection at 294 general practices, before and during the covid-19 pandemic. Intervention Elicitation of parental concerns during consultation; a clinician focused prognostic algorithm to identify children at very low, normal, or elevated 30 day risk of hospital admission accompanied by antibiotic prescribing guidance; and a leaflet for carers including safety netting advice. Main outcome measures Rate of dispensed amoxicillin and macrolide antibiotics (superiority comparison) and hospital admissions for respiratory tract infection (non-inferiority comparison) for children aged 0-9 years over 12 months (same age practice list size as denominator). Results Of 310 practices needed, 294 (95%) were randomised (144 intervention and 150 controls) representing 5% of all registered 0-9 year olds in England. Of these, 12 (4%) subsequently withdrew (six owing to the pandemic). Median intervention use per practice was 70 (by a median of 9 clinicians). No evidence was found that antibiotic dispensing differed between intervention practices (155 (95% confidence interval 138 to 174) items/year/1000 children) and control practices (157 (140 to 176) items/year/1000 children) (rate ratio 1.011, 95% confidence interval 0.992 to 1.029; P=0.25). Pre-specified subgroup analyses suggested reduced dispensing in intervention practices with fewer prescribing nurses, in single site (compared with multisite) practices, and in practices located in areas of lower socioeconomic deprivation, which may warrant future investigation. Pre-specified sensitivity analysis suggested reduced dispensing among older children in the intervention arm (P=0.03). A post hoc sensitivity analysis suggested less dispensing in intervention practices before the pandemic (rate ratio 0.967, 0.946 to 0.989; P=0.003). The rate of hospital admission for respiratory tract infections in the intervention practices (13 (95% confidence interval 10 to 18) admissions/1000 children) was non-inferior compared with control practices (15 (12 to 20) admissions/1000 children) (rate ratio 0.952, 0.905 to 1.003). Conclusions This multifaceted antibiotic stewardship intervention for children with respiratory tract infections did not reduce overall antibiotic dispensing or increase respiratory tract infection related hospital admissions. Evidence suggested that in some subgroups and situations (for example, under non-pandemic conditions) the intervention slightly reduced prescribing rates but not in a clinically relevant way. Trial registration ISRCTN11405239ISRCTN registry ISRCTN11405239

Introduction Non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs), such as handwashing, social distancing and face mask wearing, have been widely promoted to reduce the spread of COVID-19. This study aimed to explore the relationship between self-reported use of NPIs and COVID-19 infection. Methods We conducted an online questionnaire study recruiting members of the UK public from November 2020 to May 2021. The association between self-reported COVID-19 illness and reported use of NPIs was explored using logistic regression and controlling for participant characteristics, month of questionnaire completion, and vaccine status. Participants who had been exposed to COVID-19 in their household in the previous 2 weeks were excluded. Results Twenty-seven thousand seven hundred fifty-eight participants were included and 2,814 (10.1%) reported having a COVID-19 infection. The odds of COVID-19 infection were reduced with use of a face covering in unadjusted (OR 0.17 (95% CI: 0.15 to 0.20) and adjusted (aOR 0.19, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.23) analyses. Social distancing (OR 0.27, 95% CI: 0.22 to 0.31; aOR 0.35, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.43) and handwashing when arriving home (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.73; aOR 0.63, 95% CI: 0.48 to 0.83) also reduced the odds of COVID-19. Being in crowded places of 10–100 people (OR 1.89, 95% CI: 1.70 to 2.11; aOR 1.62, 95% CI: 1.42 to 1.85) and > 100 people (OR 2.33, 95% CI: 2.11 to 2.58; aOR 1.73, 95% CI: 1.53 to 1.97) were both associated with increased odds of COVID-19 infection. Handwashing before eating, avoiding touching the face, and cleaning things with virus on were all associated with increased odds of COVID-19 infections. Conclusions This large observational study found evidence for strong protective effects for individuals from use of face coverings, social distancing (including avoiding crowded places) and handwashing on arriving home on developing COVID-19 infection. We also found evidence for an increased risk associated with other behaviours, possibly from recall bias.

BackgroundAntibiotics are commonly prescribed for children with chest infections but there is little randomised evidence and trials commonly recruit selected populations, which undermines their applicability.AimTo document the effectiveness of antibiotics for chest infections in children.Design and settingThis was a prospective cohort study with nested trial in primary care.MethodChildren aged 1–12 years presenting with uncomplicated lower respiratory tract infections were included in the cohort. Children were either randomised to receive amoxicillin 50 mg/kg per day for 7 days or placebo, or participated in a parallel observational study, where propensity scores controlled for confounding by indication. The outcomes were duration of symptoms rated moderately bad or worse (primary outcome) and illness progression requiring hospital assessment.ResultsA total of 764 children participated (438 trial, 326 observational), and children were more unwell than in previous cohorts (more sputum, fever, shortness of breath). Children had been unwell for a median of 5–6 days, and symptoms rated moderately bad or worse lasted another 6 days when no antibiotics were given.With antibiotics there was a non-significant reduction of approximately 1 day in duration of symptoms rated moderately bad or worse for the whole cohort (hazard ratio [HR] 1.16, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.95 to 1.41), similar to the trial alone (HR 1.13, 95% CI = 0.90 to 1.43). The effect of antibiotic treatment on secondary outcomes was also non-significant.ConclusionAntibiotics for uncomplicated chest infections, even in a sample of more unwell children, are unlikely to be clinically very effective.

BackgroundRandomised trials provide high-quality evidence on the effects of prescribing antibiotics for urinary tract infection (UTI) but may not reflect the effects in those who consume antibiotics. Moreover, they mostly compare different antibiotic types or regimens but rarely include a ‘no antibiotic’ group.AimTo estimate the effect of antibiotic consumption, rather than prescription, on time to recovery in females with uncomplicated UTI.Design and settingSecondary analysis of 14-day observational data from a point-of-care test trial for UTI in primary care in England, the Netherlands, Spain, and Wales, which ran from 2012 to 2014. Clinicians treated patients using their own judgement, providing immediate, delayed, or no antibiotic.MethodUTI-symptomatic females who either consumed or did not consume antibiotics during a 14-day follow-up were included. Antibiotic consumption was standardised across participants and grouped into either ≤3 or >3 standardised antibiotic days. To account for confounders, a robust propensity score matching analysis was conducted. Adjusted Kaplan–Meier and Cox proportional hazard models were employed to estimate time to recovery and hazard ratios, respectively.ResultsA total ofn= 333 females who consumed antibiotics andn= 80 females who did not consume antibiotics were identified and included in the study. The adjusted median time to recovery was 2 days longer among patients who did not consume antibiotics (9 days, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 7 to 12) compared with those who did (7 days, 95% CI = 7 to 8). No difference was found between those who consumed ≤3 (7 days, 95% CI = 7 to 8) compared with >3 standardised antibiotic days (7 days, 95% CI = 6 to 9).ConclusionConsuming antibiotics was associated with a reduction in self-reported time to recovery, but more antibiotics exposure was not associated with faster recovery in this study.

Background Impetigo is a common superficial skin infection that affects people worldwide and is usually treated with antibiotics; therefore, its management has implications for global antibiotic stewardship. Objective This systematic review and narrative synthesis compares and contrasts international impetigo management guidelines. Methods Guidelines for treatment of impetigo that were produced by a national authority; available to primary care physicians; and published since 2008 were included. Following a comprehensive search strategy, data extraction from eligible studies was performed independently in duplicate. Details of antiseptic and antibiotic treatment; methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus treatment; and conservative management and preventative measures were tabulated and analysed descriptively. Results Fifty-one guidelines were included from 42 different countries. All guidelines recommended systemic antibiotics, 78% of these only for widespread lesions or failure of topical antibiotic treatment. The first-line systemic antibiotic treatment was restricted to narrow-spectrum options in 21 (41%) whilst 7 (14%) recommended only broad-spectrum antibiotics first-line. Thirty-four (67%) guidelines included recommendations for topical antibiotic use. Twenty guidelines (39%) did not mention antiseptic treatment for impetigo. Guidelines did not always provide clear indications for different treatment options. Conclusions Despite potentially equal efficacy to systemic antibiotics, only two-thirds of guidelines include topical antibiotic options. Many fail to include recommendations for non-antibiotic treatments such as antiseptics, preventative measures and conservative management, despite potential for antibiotic-sparing. Provision of clear definitions of disease severity and indications for treatment would enhance the ability of clinicians to adhere to recommendations. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42018117770

Background: Antibiotic resistance is a global public health threat. Antibiotics are very commonly prescribed for children presenting with uncomplicated lower respiratory tract infections (LRTIs), but there is little evidence from randomised controlled trials of the effectiveness of antibiotics, both overall or among key clinical subgroups. In ARTIC PC, we assessed whether amoxicillin reduces the duration of moderately bad symptoms in children presenting with uncomplicated (non-pneumonic) LRTI in primary care, overall and in key clinical subgroups. Methods: ARTIC PC was a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial done at 56 general practices in England. Eligible children were those aged 6 months to 12 years presenting in primary care with acute uncomplicated LRTI judged to be infective in origin, where pneumonia was not suspected clinically, with symptoms for less than 21 days. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive amoxicillin 50 mg/kg per day or placebo oral suspension, in three divided doses orally for 7 days. Patients and investigators were masked to treatment assignment. The primary outcome was the duration of symptoms rated moderately bad or worse (measured using a validated diary) for up to 28 days or until symptoms resolved. The primary outcome and safety were assessed in the intention-to-treat population. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN Registry (ISRCTN79914298). Findings: Between Nov 9, 2016, and March 17, 2020, 432 children (not including six who withdrew permission for use of their data after randomisation) were randomly assigned to the antibiotics group (n=221) or the placebo group (n=211). Complete data for symptom duration were available for 317 (73%) patients; missing data were imputed for the primary analysis. Median durations of moderately bad or worse symptoms were similar between the groups (5 days [IQR 4–11] in the antibiotics group vs 6 days [4–15] in the placebo group; hazard ratio [HR] 1·13 [95% CI 0·90–1·42]). No differences were seen for the primary outcome between the treatment groups in the five prespecified clinical subgroups (patients with chest signs, fever, physician rating of unwell, sputum or chest rattle, and short of breath). Estimates from complete-case analysis and a per-protocol analysis were similar to the imputed data analysis. Interpretation: Amoxicillin for uncomplicated chest infections in children is unlikely to be clinically effective either overall or for key subgroups in whom antibiotics are commonly prescribed. Unless pneumonia is suspected, clinicians should provide safety-netting advice but not prescribe antibiotics for most children presenting with chest infections.

Introduction Identifying predictors of bacterial and viral pathogens in sputum from patients with acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) may help direct management. Methods We used data from a trial evaluating a C-reactive protein (CRP) point of care guided approach to managing COPD exacerbations in primary care. We used regression analyses to identify baseline clinical features, including CRP value in those randomized to testing, associated with bacterial, viral or mixed infections, defined by the presence of bacterial and viral pathogens in sputum, detected by culture or polymerase chain reaction (PCR), respectively. Results Of 386 participants with baseline sputum samples, 79 (20.5%), 123 (31.9%), and 91 (23.6%) had bacterial, viral/atypical, and mixed bacterial/viral/atypical pathogens identified, respectively. Increasing sputum purulence assessed by color chart was associated with increased odds of finding bacterial and mixed (bacterial and viral/atypical) pathogens in sputum (area under the ROC curve (AUROC) for bacterial pathogens =0.739 (95% CI: 0.670, 0.808)). Elevated CRP was associated with increased odds of finding bacterial pathogens and mixed pathogens but did not significantly increase the AUROC for predicting bacterial pathogens over sputum color alone (AUROC for combination of sputum color and CRP = 0.776 (95% CI: 0.708, 0.843), p for comparison of models = 0.053). We found no association between the presence of sputum pathogens and other clinical or demographic features. Conclusion Sputum purulence was the best predictor of sputum bacterial pathogens and mixed bacterial viral/atypical pathogens in patients with COPD exacerbations in our study. Elevated CRP was associated with bacterial pathogens but did not add to the predictive value of sputum purulence.

Objectives\udThis study aimed to assess whether the presence of bacteria or viruses in the upper airway of children presenting with uncomplicated lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI) predicts the benefit of antibiotics.\udMethods\udChildren between 6 months and 12 years presenting to UK general practices with an acute LRTI were randomized to receive amoxicillin 50 mg/kg/d for 7 days or placebo. Children not randomized (ineligible or clinician/parental choice) could participate in a parallel observational study. The primary outcome was the duration of symptoms rated moderately bad or worse. Throat swabs were taken and analyzed for the presence of bacteria and viruses by multiplex PCR.\udResults\udSwab results were available for most participants in the trial (306 of 432; 71%) and in the observational (182 of 326; 59%) studies. Bacterial pathogens potentially sensitive to amoxicillin (Haemophilus influenzae, Moraxella catarrhalis, Streptococcus pneumoniae) were detected among 51% of the trial placebo group and 49% of the trial antibiotic group. The median difference in the duration of symptoms rated moderately bad or worse between antibiotic and placebo was similar when potentially antibiotic-susceptible bacteria were present (median: –1 day; 99% CI, –12.3 to 10.3) or not present (median: –1 day; 99% CI, –4.5 to 2.5). Furthermore, bacterial genome copy number did not predict benefit. There were similar findings for all secondary outcomes and when including the data from the observational study.\udDiscussion\udThere was no clear evidence that antibiotics improved clinical outcomes conditional on the presence or concentration of bacteria or viruses in the upper airway. Before deploying microbiologic point-of-care tests for children with uncomplicated LRTI in primary care, rigorous validating trials are needed.

Objectives: To identify predictors of acceptable hearing at 5 weeks, 6 and 12 months in children with bilateral otitis media with effusion (OME). Design and setting: Secondary analysis of OSTRICH data, conducted in hospital ear, nose and throat (ENT) and paediatric audiology and audiovestibular medicine departments across Wales and England. Participants: The OSTRICH study included 389 children aged 2-8 years with bilateral hearing loss attributable toOME for at least 3 months. Main outcome measures: Baseline, 5-week, 6- and 12-month audiology measurements were collected and logistic regression models used to identify pre-randomisation baseline variables that predicted return of acceptable hearing, which was defined as less than or equal to 20 dB hearing loss averaged within the frequencies of 0.5, 1, 2 and 4 kHz in at least one ear in children assessed by pure tone audiometry, ear-specific insert visual reinforcement audiometry or ear-specific play audiometry less than or equal to 25 dB hearing loss averaged within the frequencies of 0.5, 1, 2 and 4 kHz in children assessed by sound-field visual reinforcement audiometry or sound-field performance/play audiometry, based on national guidelines. Results: Less severe baseline hearing loss across both ears most consistently predicted acceptable hearing at 5 weeks (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.91, 95% CI 0.87- 0.95), 6 months (0.94 [0.90-0.98]) and 12 months (0.93 [0.89-0.97]). Negative history of atopy (2.05 [1.16-3.61]), never using hearing aids (aOR 2.16 [1.04-4.48]), and being male (1.75 [1.02-2.99]) were significant at 6 months, but not at 12 months. Symptom duration was a predictor at 5 weeks, but not at 6 or 12 months. Conclusions: Milder baseline hearing loss most consistently predicts acceptable hearing at 5 weeks, 6 and 12 months in children with chronic OME. Negative history of atopy, never using hearing aids, and male gender are associated with better prognosis. These predictors can be used to identify children that may not require treatment

Background Chinese herbal medicine is widely used in combination with usual care for acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) in China. Chinese patent medicine Shufeng Jiedu (SFJD) capsules is widely used for respiratory infectious diseases. This review aims to evaluate effectiveness and safety of SFJD for AECOPD. Methods A systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in patients with AECOPD, who received SFJD as a single intervention or as add-on treatment to usual care. PubMed, the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science and four Chinese databases were searched from inception to April 2019. Two authors screened trials, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias, independently. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3 software. We performed subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses according to the predefined protocol. Quality of evidence was assessed using GRADE. Results Thirteen RCTs (1036 patients, with 936 inpatients) were included, all compared SFJD in combination with usual care (including antibiotics) to usual care alone. The mean age of participants ranged from 52 to 67 years, with approximately 60% male. Due to lack of blinding and other factors, all trials were of high risk of bias. SFJD was associated with a significant reduction in treatment failure, from 20.1 to 8.3% (11 trials; 815 patients; relative risk 0.43, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.30 to 0.62), and duration of hospital stay (2 trials; 79 patients; mean difference − 4.32 days, 95% CI − 5.89 to − 2.75 days). No significant difference in adverse events was found between SFJD and control groups. Conclusion Low certainty evidence suggests SFJD may bring additional benefit in reducing treatment failure, shorten hospital stay, and improving symptoms. Further large, high quality RCTs are needed to confirm its benefit and safety. Trial registration PROSPERO CRD42019133682.

Women with uncomplicated urinary tract infection (UTI) symptoms are commonly treated with empirical antibiotics, resulting in overuse of antibiotics, which promotes antimicrobial resistance. Available diagnostic tools are either not cost-effective or diagnostically sub-optimal. Here, we identified clinical and urinary immunological predictors for UTI diagnosis. We explored 17 clinical and 42 immunological potential predictors for bacterial culture among women with uncomplicated UTI symptoms using random forest or support vector machine coupled with recursive feature elimination. Urine cloudiness was the best performing clinical predictor to rule out (negative likelihood ratio [LR−] = 0.4) and rule in (LR+ = 2.6) UTI. Using a more discriminatory scale to assess cloudiness (turbidity) increased the accuracy of UTI prediction further (LR+ = 4.4). Urinary levels of MMP9, NGAL, CXCL8 and IL-1β together had a higher LR+ (6.1) and similar LR− (0.4), compared to cloudiness. Varying the bacterial count thresholds for urine culture positivity did not alter best clinical predictor selection, but did affect the number of immunological predictors required for reaching an optimal prediction. We conclude that urine cloudiness is particularly helpful in ruling out negative UTI cases. The identified urinary biomarkers could be used to develop a point of care test for UTI but require further validation.

Lay Summary Influenza is usually diagnosed clinically. However, the accuracy of a diagnosis of influenza based on clinical features is limited because symptoms overlap considerably with those caused by other microorganisms. This study examined whether identification of the severity rather than the presence of key signs and symptoms could aid in the diagnosis of influenza, thereby helping clinicians to determine when antiviral agent use is appropriate. The authors used the database of a previous randomized clinical trial on the effectiveness of an antiviral carried out in primary care centers in 15 countries in Europe during three epidemic periods from 2015/2016 to 2017/2018. Participants with influenza symptoms were included and they were asked about the presence and severity of different symptoms during the baseline visit with their doctors and a nasopharyngeal swab was taken for microbiological analysis. Overall, only 51% of the patients aged 18 or older had a confirmed influenza infection. Clinical findings are not particularly useful for confirming or excluding the diagnosis of influenza. However, the results of our study recommend considering how intense the different symptoms are, since key symptoms rated as moderate or severe are slightly better for predicting flu rather than the presence or absence of these symptoms. Background Clinical findings do not accurately predict laboratory diagnosis of influenza. Early identification of influenza is considered useful for proper management decisions in primary care. Objective We evaluated the diagnostic value of the presence and the severity of symptoms for the diagnosis of laboratory-confirmed influenza infection among adults presenting with influenza-like illness (ILI) in primary care. Methods Secondary analysis of patients with ILI who participated in a clinical trial from 2015 to 2018 in 15 European countries. Patients rated signs and symptoms as absent, minor, moderate, or major problem. A nasopharyngeal swab was taken for microbiological identification of influenza and other microorganisms. Models were generated considering (i) the presence of individual symptoms and (ii) the severity rating of symptoms. Results A total of 2,639 patients aged 18 or older were included in the analysis. The mean age was 41.8 +/- 14.7 years, and 1,099 were men (42.1%). Influenza was microbiologically confirmed in 1,337 patients (51.1%). The area under the curve (AUC) of the model for the presence of any of seven symptoms for detecting influenza was 0.66 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.65-0.68), whereas the AUC of the symptom severity model, which included eight variables-cough, fever, muscle aches, sweating and/or chills, moderate to severe overall disease, age, abdominal pain, and sore throat-was 0.70 (95% CI: 0.69-0.72). Conclusion Clinical prediction of microbiologically confirmed influenza in adults with ILI is slightly more accurate when based on patient reported symptom severity than when based on the presence or absence of symptoms.

Background The Patient‐Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM) is the core outcome instrument recommended for measuring patient‐reported atopic eczema symptoms in clinical trials. To ensure that the statistical significance of clinical trial results is meaningful, trials are often designed by specifying the target difference in the primary outcome as part of the sample size calculation. One method used to specify the target difference is a score that corresponds to a standardized effect size. Objectives to assess how the standardized effect size of POEM scores vary across age, gender, ethnicity and disease severity. Methods This study combined data from five UK‐based randomized clinical trials of eczema treatments in order to assess differences in self‐reported eczema symptoms (POEM) corresponding to a standardized effect size (0.5 SD of baseline POEM scores) across age, gender, ethnicity and disease severity. Results POEM scores corresponding to 0.5 SD(baseline) were remarkably consistent across participants of varying ages, gender, ethnicity and disease severity from datasets of five UK trials in children (range 2.99–3.45). Conclusions This study provides information that can support those designing clinical trials to determine their sample size and can aid individuals interpreting trial results. Further exploration of differences in populations beyond the United Kingdom is needed.

IntroductionAcne is one of the most common inflammatory skin diseases worldwide and can have significant psychosocial impact and cause permanent scarring. Spironolactone, a potassium-sparing diuretic, has antiandrogenic properties, potentially reducing sebum production and hyperkeratinisation in acne-prone follicles. Dermatologists have prescribed spironolactone for acne in women for over 30 years, but robust clinical study data are lacking. This study seeks to evaluate whether spironolactone is clinically effective and cost-effective in treating acne in women.Methods and analysisWomen (≥18 years) with persistent facial acne requiring systemic therapy are randomised to receive one tablet per day of 50 mg spironolactone or a matched placebo until week 6, increasing to up to two tablets per day (total of 100 mg spironolactone or matched placebo) until week 24, along with usual topical therapy if desired. Study treatment stops at week 24; participants are informed of their treatment allocation and enter an unblinded observational follow-up period for up to 6 months (up to week 52 after baseline). Primary outcome is the Acne-specific Quality of Life (Acne-QoL) symptom subscale score at week 12. Secondary outcomes include Acne-QoL total and subscales; participant acne self-assessment recorded on a 6-point Likert scale at 6, 12, 24 weeks and up to 52 weeks; Investigator’s Global Assessment at weeks 6 and 12; cost and cost effectiveness are assessed over 24 weeks. Aiming to detect a group difference of 2 points on the Acne-QoL symptom subscale (SD 5.8, effect size 0.35), allowing for 20% loss to follow-up, gives a sample size of 398 participants.Ethics and disseminationThis protocol was approved by Wales Research Ethics Committee (18/WA/0420). Follow-up to be completed in early 2022. Findings will be disseminated to participants, peer-reviewed journals, networks and patient groups, on social media, on the study website and the Southampton Clinical Trials Unit website to maximise impact.Trial registration numberISRCTN12892056;Pre-results.

ObjectivesTo assess the real-world diagnostic accuracy of the Livzon point-of-care rapid test for antibodies to SARS-COV-2DesignProspective cohort studySettingDistrict general hospital in EnglandParticipants173 Patients and 224 hospital staff with a history of COVID-19 symptoms, and who underwent PCR and/or reference antibody testing for COVID-19.InterventionsThe Livzon point-of-care (POC) lateral flow immunoassay rapid antibody test (IgM and IgG) was conducted at least 7 days after onset of symptoms and compared to the composite reference standard of PCR for SARS-COV-2 plus reference laboratory testing for antibodies to SARS-COV-2. The SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR was tested using the available molecular technology during the study time (PHE laboratories, GeneXpert®system Xpert, Xpress SARS-CoV-2 and Source bioscience laboratory). All molecular platforms/assays were PHE/NHSE approved. The reference antibody test was the Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 assay (Roche diagnostics GmBH).Main outcome measuresSensitivity and specificity of the rapid antibody testResultsThe reference antibody test was positive in 190/268 (70.9%) of participants with a history of symptoms suggestive of COVID-19; in the majority (n=312) the POC test was taken 35 days or more after onset of symptoms. The POC antibody test had an overall sensitivity of 90.1% (292/328, 95% CI 86.3 – 93.1) and specificity of 100% (68/68, 95% CI 94.7 - 100) for confirming prior SARS-CoV-2 infection when compared to the composite reference standard. Sensitivity was 97.8% (89/92, 95% CI 92.3% to 99.7%) in participants who had been admitted to hospital and 84.4% (124/147, 95% CI 77.5% to 89.8%) in those with milder illness who had never been seen in hospital.ConclusionsThe Livzon point-of-care antibody test had comparable sensitivity and specificity to the reference laboratory antibody test, so could be used in clinical settings to support decision-making about patients presenting with more than 10 days of symptoms of COVID-19.What is already known on this topic-Presence of IgG and IgM antibodies to SARS-COV-2 indicates that the person was infected at least 7 days previously and is usually no longer infectious.-Rapid point-of-care tests for antibodies to SARS-COV-2 are widely available, cheap and easy to use-Preliminary evaluations suggested that rapid antibody tests may have insufficient accuracy to be useful for testing individual patients.What this study adds-The rapid point-of-care test for antibodies to SARS-COV-2 was 90.1% sensitive and 100% specific compared to reference standards for prior infection with COVID-19.-This is comparable to reference antibody tests-The point-of-care test evaluated in this study could be used to support clinical decision-making in real time, for patients presenting with symptoms of possible COVID-19 with at least 10 days of symptoms.

As Bradley says,12 there is no evidence that early treatment of suspected sepsis in primary care improves outcomes. The key challenge in primary care is the timely identification of early sepsis, which can be indistinguishable from common infections. Observational data indicate that the risk of sepsis in respiratory tract infections is lower …

Background Acute otitis media (AOM) is a common reason for primary care consultations and antibiotic prescribing in children. Options for improved pain control may influence antibiotic prescribing and consumption. Objective The Children’s Ear Pain Study (CEDAR) investigated whether or not providing anaesthetic–analgesic ear drops reduced antibiotic consumption in children with AOM. Secondary objectives included pain control and cost-effectiveness. Design A multicentre, randomised, parallel-group (two-group initially, then three-group) trial. Setting Primary care practices in England and Wales. Participants 1- to 10-year-old children presenting within 1 week of suspected AOM onset with ear pain during the preceding 24 hours and not requiring immediate antibiotics. Participating children were logged into the study and allocated using a remote randomisation service. Interventions Two-group trial – unblinded comparison of anaesthetic–analgesic ear drops versus usual care. Three-group trial – blinded comparison of anaesthetic–analgesic ear drops versus placebo ear drops and unblinded comparison with usual care. Main outcome measures The primary outcome measure was parent-reported antibiotic use by the child over 8 days following enrolment. Secondary measures included ear pain at day 2 and NHS and societal costs over 8 days. Results Owing to a delay in provision of the placebo drops, the recruitment period was shortened and most participants were randomly allocated to the two-group study (n = 74) rather than the three-group study (n = 32). Comparing active drops with usual care in the combined two-group and three-group studies, 1 out of 39 (3%) children allocated to the active drops group and 11 out of 38 (29%) children allocated to the usual-care group consumed antibiotics in the 8 days following enrolment [unadjusted odds ratio 0.09, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.02 to 0.55; p = 0.009; adjusted for delayed prescribing odds ratio 0.15, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.87; p = 0.035]. A total of 43% (3/7) of patients in the placebo drops group consumed antibiotics by day 8, compared with 0% (0/10) of the three-group study active drops groups (p = 0.051). The economic analysis of NHS costs (£12.66 for active drops and £11.36 for usual care) leads to an estimated cost of £5.19 per antibiotic prescription avoided, but with a high degree of uncertainty. A reduction in ear pain at day 2 in the placebo group (n = 7) compared with the active drops group (n = 10) (adjusted difference in means 0.67, 95% CI –1.44 to 2.79; p = 0.51) is consistent with chance. No adverse events were reported in children receiving active drops. Limitations Estimated treatment effects are imprecise because the sample size target was not met. It is not clear if delayed prescriptions of an antibiotic were written prior to randomisation. Few children received placebo drops, which hindered the investigation of ear pain. Conclusions This study suggests that reduced antibiotic use can be achieved in children with AOM by combining a no or delayed antibiotic prescribing strategy with anaesthetic–analgesic ear drops. Whether or not the active drops relieved ear pain was not established. Future work The observed reduction in antibiotic consumption following the prescription of ear drops requires replication in a larger study. Future work should establish if the effect of ear drops is due to pain relief. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN09599764. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 23, No. 34. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. Alastair D Hay was funded by a NIHR Research Professorship (funding identifier NIHR-RP-02-12-012).

Purpose Clinical guidelines recommend at least 7 days of antibiotic treatment for older men with urinary tract infection (UTI). There may be potential benefits for patients, health services, and antimicrobial stewardship if shorter antibiotic treatment resulted in similar outcomes. We aimed to determine if treatment duration could be reduced by estimating risk of adverse outcomes according to different prescription durations. Methods This retrospective cohort study included men aged greater than or equal to 65 years old with a suspected UTI. We compared outcomes in men prescribed 3, 5, 7, and 8 to 14 days of antibiotic treatment in a multivariable logistic regression analysis and 3 versus 7 days in a propensity-score matched analysis. Our outcomes were reconsultation and represcription (proxy for treatment failure), hospitalisation for UTI, sepsis, or acute kidney injury (AKI), and death. Results Of 360 640 men aged greater than or equal to 65 years, 33 745 (9.4%) had a UTI. Compared with 7 days, men prescribed 3-day treatment had greater odds of reconsultation and represcription (adjusted OR 1.48; 95% CI, 1.25-1.74) but lower odds of AKI hospitalisation (adjusted OR 0.66; 95% CI, 0.45-0.97). We estimated that treating 150 older men with 3 days instead of 7 days of antibiotics could result in four extra reconsultation and represcriptions and one less AKI hospitalisation. We estimated annual prescription cost savings at around £2.2 million. Conclusions Antibiotic treatment for older men with suspected UTI could be reduced to 3 days, albeit with a small increase in risk of treatment failure. A definitive randomised trial is urgently needed.

BackgroundAntibiotic overuse is linked to increased risk of antimicrobial resistance. Long-term antibiotics are commonly used for treating acne and prophylaxis of urinary tract infection. Their contribution to the overall burden of antibiotic use is relatively unknown.AimTo describe the volume of commonly prescribed long-term (≥28 days) antibiotic prescriptions in adolescents and young adults, trends over time, and comparisons with acute prescriptions.Design and settingA retrospective cohort study using UK electronic primary care records.MethodPatients born between 1979 and 1996 and with data in the Care and Health Information Analytics database were included. The main outcome measures were antibiotic prescription rates per 1000 person-years and antibiotic prescription days per person-year between the ages of 11 and 21.ResultsIn total, 320 722 participants received 710 803 antibiotic prescriptions between the ages of 11 and 21 years from 1998 to 2017. Of these 710 803 prescriptions, 191 443 (26.93%) were for long-term antibiotics (≥28 days and ≤6 months in duration). Long-term antibiotics accounted for more than two-thirds (72.48%) of total antibiotic exposure (days per person-year). Total long-term antibiotic prescribing peaked in 2013 at just under 6 days per person-year and declined to around 4 days in 2017.ConclusionAmong adolescents and young adults, exposure to long-term antibiotics (primarily lymecycline used for acne) was much greater than for acute antibiotics and is likely to make an important contribution to antimicrobial resistance. Urgent action is needed to reduce unnecessary exposure to long-term antibiotics in this group. Increasing the use of, and adherence to, effective non-antibiotic treatments for acne is key to achieving this.

Background Care homes are an increasingly important sector of care. Care home residents are particularly vulnerable to infections and are often prescribed antibiotics, driving antibiotic resistance. Probiotics may be a cheap and safe way to reduce antibiotic use. Efficacy and possible mechanisms of action are yet to be rigorously evaluated in this group. Objective The objective was to evaluate efficacy and explore mechanisms of action of a daily oral probiotic combination in reducing antibiotic use and infections in care home residents. Design This was a multicentre, parallel, individually randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial, with qualitative evaluation and mechanistic studies. Setting A total of 310 care home residents were randomised from 23 UK care homes (from December 2016 to May 2018). Participants The participants were care home residents aged ≥ 65 years who were willing and able to give informed consent or, if they lacked capacity to consent, had a consultee to advise about participation on their behalf. Intervention A daily capsule containing an oral probiotic combination of Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG and Bifidobacterium animalis subsp. lactis BB-12 (n = 155) or matched placebo (n = 155) for up to 1 year. Main outcome measures The primary outcome was cumulative systemic antibiotic administration days for all-cause infections. Secondary outcomes included incidence and duration of infections, antibiotic-associated diarrhoea, quality of life, hospitalisations and the detection of resistant Enterobacterales cultured from stool samples (not exclusively). Methods Participants were randomised (1 : 1) to receive capsules containing probiotic or matched placebo. Minimisation was implemented for recruiting care home and care home resident sex. Care home residents were followed up for 12 months with a review by a research nurse at 3 months and at 6–12 months post randomisation. Care home residents, consultees, care home staff and all members of the trial team, including assessors and statisticians, were blinded to group allocation. Results Care home residents who were randomised to probiotic had a mean 12.9 cumulative systemic antibiotic administration days (standard error 1.49 days) (n = 152) and care home residents randomised to placebo had a mean 12.0 cumulative systemic antibiotic administration days (standard error 1.50 days) (n = 153) (adjusted incidence rate ratio = 1.13, 95% confidence interval 0.79 to 1.63; p = 0.495). There was no evidence of any beneficial effects on incidence and duration of infections, antibiotic-associated diarrhoea, quality of life, hospitalisations, the detection of resistant Enterobacterales cultured from stool samples or other secondary outcomes. There was no evidence that this probiotic combination improved blood immune cell numbers, subtypes or responses to seasonal influenza vaccination. Conclusions Care home residents did not benefit from daily consumption of a combination of the probiotics Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG and Bifidobacterium animalis subsp. lactis BB-12 to reduce antibiotic consumption. Limitations Limitations included the following: truncated follow-up of some participants; higher than expected probiotics in stool samples at baseline; fewer events than expected meant that study power may have been lower than anticipated; standard infection-related definitions were not used; and findings are not necessarily generalisable because effects may be strain specific and could vary according to patient population. Future work Future work could involve further rigorous efficacy, mechanisms and effectiveness trials of other probiotics in other population groups and settings regarding antibiotic use and susceptibility to and recovery from infections, in which potential harms should be carefully studied. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN16392920. Funding This project was funded by the Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation (EME) programme, a MRC and NIHR partnership. This will be published in full in Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation; Vol. 8, No. 7. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Objective To assess the overall effect of delayed antibiotic prescribing on average symptom severity for patients with respiratory tract infections in the community, and to identify any factors modifying this effect. Design Systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis. Data sources Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase, EBSCO CINAHL Plus, and Web of Science. Eligibility criteria for study selection Randomised controlled trials and observational cohort studies in a community setting that allowed comparison between delayed versus no antibiotic prescribing, and delayed versus immediate antibiotic prescribing. Main outcome measures The primary outcome was the average symptom severity two to four days after the initial consultation measured on a seven item scale (ranging from normal to as bad as could be). Secondary outcomes were duration of illness after the initial consultation, complications resulting in admission to hospital or death, reconsultation with the same or worsening illness, and patient satisfaction rated on a Likert scale. Results Data were obtained from nine randomised controlled trials and four observational studies, totalling 55 682 patients. No difference was found in follow-up symptom severity (seven point scale) for delayed versus immediate antibiotics (adjusted mean difference −0.003, 95% confidence interval −0.12 to 0.11) or delayed versus no antibiotics (0.02, −0.11 to 0.15). Symptom duration was slightly longer in those given delayed versus immediate antibiotics (11.4 v 10.9 days), but was similar for delayed versus no antibiotics. Complications resulting in hospital admission or death were lower with delayed versus no antibiotics (odds ratio 0.62, 95% confidence interval 0.30 to 1.27) and delayed versus immediate antibiotics (0.78, 0.53 to 1.13). A significant reduction in reconsultation rates (odds ratio 0.72, 95% confidence interval 0.60 to 0.87) and an increase in patient satisfaction (adjusted mean difference 0.09, 0.06 to 0.11) were observed in delayed versus no antibiotics. The effect of delayed versus immediate antibiotics and delayed versus no antibiotics was not modified by previous duration of illness, fever, comorbidity, or severity of symptoms. Children younger than 5 years had a slightly higher follow-up symptom severity with delayed antibiotics than with immediate antibiotics (adjusted mean difference 0.10, 95% confidence interval 0.03 to 0.18), but no increased severity was found in the older age group. Conclusions Delayed antibiotic prescribing is a safe and effective strategy for most patients, including those in higher risk subgroups. Delayed prescribing was associated with similar symptom duration as no antibiotic prescribing and is unlikely to lead to poorer symptom control than immediate antibiotic prescribing. Delayed prescribing could reduce reconsultation rates and is unlikely to be associated with an increase in symptoms or illness duration, except in young children. Study registration PROSPERO CRD42018079400.

BackgroundRandomised trials provide high-quality data on the effects of antibiotics for urinary tract infections (UTI) but are prone to selection bias and may not accurately reflect effects in those who actually consume antibiotics.AimTo estimate the effect of antibiotic consumption, rather than prescription, on self-reported time to recovery in women with uncomplicated UTI.Design and settingSecondary analysis of data from a randomised control trial on point of care diagnostic to guide antibiotic prescribing in primary care. Antibiotic prescribing decisions were not mandated by the trial protocol.Methods413 adult women presenting with UTI symptoms and who either consumed (n=333) or did not consume (n=80) one or more doses of antibiotics during a 14-day follow-up were included. Antibiotic consumption was standardised using defined daily dose (DDD) and described as “days-worth of antibiotics”. Cox-proportional hazard model was used to estimate the effect of antibiotic consumption upon time to self-reported recovery, controlling for potential confounders and propensity of consuming antibiotics based on baseline symptom severity and history of UTI treatment.ResultsThe crude median time to recovery was 3 days longer among patients who did not consume antibiotics (10 days; 95% CI= 8.5-11.5) compared to those who consumed antibiotics (7 days; 95% CI= 6.5-7.5). Patients who consumed >0 to 5 days-worth of antibiotics recovered at approximately 2 – 3 times faster than the rate of those who consumed no antibiotics, adjusted HR 3.2 (95% CI 2.0, 5.1), 2.8 (1.8, 4.3), 2.3 (1.5, 3.7), respectively.ConclusionConsuming antibiotics was associated with a reduction in self-reported time to recovery in this study which is consistent with results from previous trials.

IntroductionRespiratory tract infections (RTIs) in children are common and present major resource implications for primary care. Unnecessary use of antibiotics is associated with the development and proliferation of antimicrobial resistance. In 2016, the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR)-funded ‘TARGET’ programme developed a prognostic algorithm to identify children with acute cough and RTI at very low risk of 30-day hospitalisation and unlikely to need antibiotics. The intervention includes: (1) explicit elicitation of parental concerns, (2) the results of the prognostic algorithm accompanied by prescribing guidance and (3) provision of a printout for carers including safety netting advice. The CHIldren’s COugh feasibility study suggested differential recruitment of healthier patients in control practices. This phase III ‘efficiently designed’ trial uses routinely collected data at the practice level, thus avoiding individual patient consent. The aim is to assess whether embedding a multifaceted intervention into general practitioner (GP) practice Information Technology (IT) systems will result in reductions of antibiotic prescribing without impacting on hospital attendance for RTI.Methods and analysisThe coprimary outcomes are (1) practice rate of dispensed amoxicillin and macrolide antibiotics, (2) hospital admission rate for RTI using routinely collected data by Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs). Data will be collected for children aged 0–9 years registered at 310 practices (155 intervention, 155 usual care) over a 12-month period. Recruitment and randomisation of practices (using the Egton Medical Information Systems web data management system) is conducted via each CCG stratified for children registered and baseline dispensing rates of each practice. Secondary outcomes will explore intervention effect modifiers. Qualitative interviews will explore intervention usage. The economic evaluation will be limited to a between-arm comparison in a cost–consequence analysis.Ethics and disseminationResearch ethics approval was given by London-Camden and Kings Cross Research Ethics Committee (ref:18/LO/0345). This manuscript refers to protocol V.4.0. Results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals and international conferences.Trial registration numberISRCTN11405239.

Children presenting with uncomplicated lower respiratory tract infections (LRTIs) commonly receive antibiotics despite public campaigns on antibiotic resistance. Qualitative interview studies were nested in a placebo-controlled trial of amoxicillin for LRTI in children. Thirty semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with sixteen parents and fourteen clinicians to explore views of management and decisions to participate in the trial. All interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed using thematic analysis. Parents found it difficult to interpret symptoms and signs, and commonly used the type of cough (based on sound) to judge severity, highlighting the importance of better information to support parents. Provision of a clinical examination and reassurance regarding illness severity were key motivations for consulting. Many parents now acknowledge that antibiotics should only be used when ‘necessary’, and clinicians reported noticing a shift in parent attitudes with less demand for antibiotics and greater satisfaction with clinical assessment, reassurance and advice. Decisions to take part in the trial were influenced by the perceived risks associated with allocation to a placebo, and concerns about unnecessary use of antibiotics. Clear communication about self-management and safety-netting were identified as important when implementing ‘no antibiotic’ prescribing strategies to reassure parents and to support prescribing decisions.

BackgroundC-reactive protein (CRP) point-of-care testing can reduce antibiotic use in patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) in primary care, without compromising patient care. Further safe reductions may be possible.AimTo investigate the associations between presenting features and antibiotic prescribing in patients with AECOPD in primary care.Design and settingSecondary analysis of a randomised controlled trial of participants presenting with AECOPD in primary care (the PACE trial).MethodClinicians collected participants’ demographic features, comorbid illnesses, clinical signs, and symptoms. Antibiotic prescribing decisions were made after participants were randomised to receive a point-of-care CRP measurement or usual care. Multivariable regression models were fitted to explore the association between patient and clinical features and antibiotic prescribing, and extended to further explore any interactions with CRP measurement category (CRP not measured, CRP ResultsA total of 649 participants from 86 general practices across England and Wales were included. Odds of antibiotic prescribing were higher in the presence of clinician-recorded crackles (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 5.22, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 3.24 to 8.41), wheeze (AOR = 1.64, 95% CI = 1.07 to 2.52), diminished vesicular breathing (AOR = 2.95, 95% CI = 1.70 to 5.10), or clinician-reported evidence of consolidation (AOR = 34.40, 95% CI = 2.84 to 417.27). Increased age was associated with lower odds of antibiotic prescribing (AOR per additional year increase = 0.98, 95% CI = 0.95 to 1.00), as was the presence of heart failure (AOR = 0.32, 95% CI = 0.12 to 0.85).ConclusionSeveral demographic features and clinical signs and symptoms are associated with antibiotic prescribing in AECOPD. Diagnostic and prognostic value of these features may help identify further safe reductions.

Background and Objective Influenza-like illness (ILI) leads to a substantial disease burden every winter in Europe; however, oseltamivir is not frequently prescribed to ILI patients in the primary-care setting. An open-label, multi-country, multi-season, randomised controlled trial investigated the effectiveness of oseltamivir for treating ILI in 15 European countries. We aimed to evaluate whether patients presenting with ILI in primary care and being managed with the addition of oseltamivir to usual care had lower average direct and indirect costs compared to patients with usual care alone. Methods Resource use data were extracted from participants' daily diaries. Itemised country-specific unit costs were collected through official tariffs, pharmacies or literature. Costs were converted to 2018 values. The null hypothesis was tested based on one-sided credible intervals (CrIs) obtained by bootstrapping. Base-case analysis estimated direct cost and productivity losses using itemised costed resource use and the human capital approach. Scenario analyses with self-reported spending rather than itemised costing were also performed. Results Patients receiving oseltamivir (N = 1306) reported fewer healthcare visits, medication uses, hospital attendances and paid-work hours lost than the other patients (N = 1298). Excluding the oseltamivir cost, the average direct costs were lower in patients treated with oseltamivir from all perspectives, but these differences were not statistically significant (perspective of patient: euro17 [0-95% Crl: 16-19] vs. euro24 [5-100% Crl: 18-29]; healthcare provider: euro37 [28-67] vs. euro44 [25-55]; healthcare payers: euro54 [45-85] vs. euro68 [45-81]; and society: euro423 [399-478] vs. euro451 [390-478]). Scenario and age-group analyses confirmed these findings, but with some between-country differences. Conclusion The average direct and indirect costs were consistently lower in patients treated with oseltamivir than in patients without from four perspectives (excluding the oseltamivir cost). However, these differences were not statistically significant. The ALIC4E trial and the contributions of AWV, EB, SC, NF, PS, NJH, PaB, AGS, DG, KK, RMP, RRJ, BS, NT, RA, CCB and PB were funded by the European Commission’s Seventh Framework Programme: Platform for European Preparedness Against (Re-)emerging Epidemics (PREPARE) (grant HEALTH-F3-2013-602525). PB, XL, JB and RB acknowledge partial Methusalem funding from the VAXIDEA and ASCID Centres of Excellence in vaccination and infectious diseases at the University of Antwerp. JB and RB were funded by their personal postdoctoral grants from the Research Foundation—Flanders (FWO). PS acknowledges that The Healthcare Committee, Region Västra Götaland, Sweden, partially funded the Swedish part of the study.

Severe sepsis is a time critical condition which is known to have a high mortality rate. Evidence suggests that early diagnosis and early administration of antibiotics can reduce morbidity and mortality from sepsis. The prehospital phase of emergency medical care may provide the earliest opportunity for identification of sepsis and delivery of life-saving treatment for patients. We aimed to assess the feasibility of (1) paramedics recognising and screening patients for severe sepsis, collecting blood cultures and administering intravenous antibiotics; and (2) trial methods in order to decide whether a fully-powered trial should be undertaken to determine safety and effectiveness of this intervention. Paramedics were trained in using a sepsis screening tool, aseptic blood culture collection and administration of intravenous antibiotics. If sepsis was suspected, paramedics randomly allocated patients to intervention or usual care using scratchcards. Patients were followed up at 90 days using linked anonymised data to capture length of hospital admission and mortality. We collected self-reported health-related quality of life at 90 days. We pre-specified criteria for deciding whether to progress to a fully-powered trial based on: recruitment of paramedics and patients; delivery of the intervention; retrieval of outcome data; safety; acceptability; and success of anonymised follow-up. Seventy-four of the 104 (71.2%) eligible paramedics agreed to take part and 54 completed their training (51.9%). Of 159 eligible patients, 146 (92%) were recognised as eligible by study paramedics, and 118 were randomised (74% of eligible patients, or 81% of those recognised as eligible). Four patients subsequently dissented to be included in the trial (3%), leaving 114 patients recruited to follow-up. All recruited patients were matched to routine data outcomes in the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage Databank. Ninety of the 114 (79%) recruited patients had sepsis or a likely bacterial infection recorded in ED. There was no evidence of any difference between groups in patient satisfaction, and no adverse reactions reported. There were no statistically significant differences between intervention and control groups in Serious Adverse Events (ICU admissions; deaths). This feasibility study met its pre-determined progression criteria; an application will therefore be prepared and submitted for funding for a fully-powered multi-centre randomised trial.Trial registration: ISRCTN36856873 sought 16th May 2017; https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN36856873

ObjectiveIdentify predictors of adverse outcome in a Virtual Hospital (VH) setting for COVID 19.DesignReal-world prospective observational study.SettingVirtual hospital remote assessment service in West Hertfordshire NHS Trust, UK.ParticipantsPatients with suspected COVID-19 illness enrolled directly from the community (post-accident and emergency (A&E) or medical intake assessment) or post-inpatient admission.Main outcome measureDeath or (re-)admission to inpatient hospital care over 28 days.Results900 patients with a clinical diagnosis of COVID-19 (455 referred from A&E or medical intake and 445 post-inpatient) were included in the analysis. 76 (8.4%) of these experienced an adverse outcome (15 deaths in admitted patients, 3 deaths in patients not admitted, and 58 additional inpatient admissions). Predictors of adverse outcome were increase in age (OR 1.04 [95%CI: 1.02, 1.06] per year of age), history of cancer (OR 2.87 [95%CI: 1.41, 5.82]), history of mental health problems (OR 1.76 [95%CI: 1.02, 3.04]), severely impaired renal function (OR for eGFR ConclusionsThese predictors may help direct intensity of monitoring for patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 who are being remotely monitored by primary or secondary care services. Further research is needed to identify the reasons for increased risk of adverse outcome associated with cancer and mental health problems.ARTICLE SUMMARYStrengths and limitations of this studyThe study uses anonymised data from all patients registered for the virtual hospital between 17/03/20 and 17/05/20, and therefore selection bias is not an issue.At the time of this study, this was the only service providing remote follow-up for patients with suspected COVID-19 in the area, and therefore our findings are likely to be relevant to primary care patients receiving remote follow-up.We were able to collect reliable data on a wide range of clinical and demographic features, and reliably follow all patients for the primary outcome for at least two weeks following their discharge from the VH.We were not able to extract detailed symptom or clinical examination data, and there were significant amounts of missing data for some variables.Our study is likely underpowered to detect all predictors, especially in the analysis of our two sub-groups

Importance Probiotics are frequently used by residents in care homes (residential homes or nursing homes that provide residents with 24-hour support for personal care or nursing care), although the evidence on whether probiotics prevent infections and reduce antibiotic use in these settings is limited. Objective To determine whether a daily oral probiotic combination of Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG and Bifidobacterium animalis subsp lactis BB-12 compared with placebo reduces antibiotic administration in care home residents. Design, Setting, and Participants Placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial of 310 care home residents, aged 65 years and older, recruited from 23 care homes in the United Kingdom between December 2016 and May 2018, with last follow-up on October 31, 2018. Interventions Study participants were randomized to receive a daily capsule containing a probiotic combination of Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG and Bifidobacterium animalis subsp lactis BB-12 (total cell count per capsule, 1.3 × 1010 to 1.6 × 1010) (n = 155), or daily matched placebo (n = 155), for up to 1 year. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was cumulative antibiotic administration days for all-cause infections measured from randomization for up to 1 year. Results Among 310 randomized care home residents (mean age, 85.3 years; 66.8% women), 195 (62.9%) remained alive and completed the trial. Participant diary data (daily data including study product use, antibiotic administration, and signs of infection) were available for 98.7% randomized to the probiotic group and 97.4% randomized to placebo. Care home residents randomized to the probiotic group had a mean of 12.9 cumulative systemic antibiotic administration days (95% CI, 0 to 18.05), and residents randomized to placebo had a mean of 12.0 days (95% CI, 0 to 16.95) (absolute difference, 0.9 days [95% CI, –3.25 to 5.05]; adjusted incidence rate ratio, 1.13 [95% CI, 0.79 to 1.63]; P = .50). A total of 120 care home residents experienced 283 adverse events (150 adverse events in the probiotic group and 133 in the placebo group). Hospitalizations accounted for 94 of the events in probiotic group and 78 events in the placebo group, and deaths accounted for 33 of the events in the probiotic group and 32 of the events in the placebo group. Conclusions and Relevance Among care home residents in the United Kingdom, a daily dose of a probiotic combination of Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG and Bifidobacterium animalis subsp lactis BB-12 did not significantly reduce antibiotic administration for all-cause infections. These findings do not support the use of probiotics in this setting. Trial Registration ISRCTN Identifier:16392920