Dataset Information

Study protocol for a randomised controlled trial evaluating the clinical effect of antibiotic prophylaxis in children with recurrent respiratory tract infections: the Approach study.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Respiratory tract infections (RTIs) affect children all over the world and are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. In particular, recurrent RTIs cause a high burden of disease and lead to frequent doctor visits. Children with recurrent RTIs generally have no significant alterations or deficits in systemic immunity. In an attempt to treat the assumed bacterial component involved, they are often treated with prolonged courses of prophylactic antibiotics taken on a daily basis. Despite its common use, there is no evidence that this is beneficial. Studies assessing the clinical effectiveness of antibiotic prophylaxis as well as potential adverse effects and antibiotic resistance development, are therefore urgently needed.

Methods and analysis

We present a protocol for a randomised double-blind placebo-controlled trial comparing co-trimoxazole with placebo treatment in children with recurrent RTIs. A total of 158 children (aged 6 months-10 years) with recurrent RTIs without significant comorbidity will be enrolled from a minimum of 10 Dutch hospitals. One group receives co-trimoxazole 18 mg/kg two times per day (36 mg/kg/day) and the other group receives a placebo two times per day for a period of 3 months. The main objective is to determine whether antibiotic prophylaxis is more effective than placebo to prevent/reduce respiratory symptoms in children with recurrent RTIs. Respiratory symptoms will be scored by parents on a daily basis in both study arms by the use of a mobile phone application. Our primary outcome will be the number of days with at least two respiratory symptoms during the treatment.

Ethics and dissemination

Ethics approval was obtained from the Medical Ethics Research Committee Zuidwest Holland/LDD. A manuscript with the study results will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal. All participants will be informed about the study results. The results of the study will inform clinical guidelines regarding the prophylactic treatment of children with recurrent RTIs.

Trial registration number

NL7044.

SUBMITTER: Peeters D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8323378 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundRepeated symptomatic urinary tract infections (UTIs) affect 25% of people who use clean intermittent self-catheterisation (CISC) to empty their bladder. We aimed to determine the benefits, harms, and cost-effectiveness of continuous low-dose antibiotic prophylaxis for prevention of recurrent UTIs in adult users of CISC.MethodsIn this randomised, open-label, superiority trial, we enrolled participants from 51 UK National Health Service organisations. These participants were community-dwelling (as opposed to hospital inpatient) users of CISC with recurrent UTIs. We randomly allocated participants (1:1) to receive either antibiotic prophylaxis once daily (prophylaxis group) or no prophylaxis (control group) for 12 months by use of an internet-based system with permuted blocks of variable length. Trial and laboratory staff who assessed outcomes were masked to allocation but participants were aware of their treatment group. The primary outcome was the incidence of symptomatic, antibiotic-treated UTIs over 12 months. Participants who completed at least 6 months of follow-up were assumed to provide a reliable estimate of UTI incidence and were included in the analysis of the primary outcome. Change in antimicrobial resistance of urinary and faecal bacteria was monitored as a secondary outcome. The AnTIC trial is registered at ISRCTN, number 67145101; and EudraCT, number 2013-002556-32.FindingsBetween Nov 25, 2013, and Jan 29, 2016, we screened 1743 adult users of CISC for eligibility, of whom 404 (23%) participants were enrolled between Nov 26, 2013, and Jan 31, 2016. Of these 404 participants, 203 (50%) were allocated to receive prophylaxis and 201 (50%) to receive no prophylaxis. 1339 participants were excluded before randomisation. The primary analysis included 181 (89%) adults allocated to the prophylaxis group and 180 (90%) adults in the no prophylaxis (control) group. 22 participants in the prophylaxis group and 21 participants in the control group were not included in the primary analysis because they were missing follow-up data before 6 months. The incidence of symptomatic antibiotic-treated UTIs over 12 months was 1·3 cases per person-year (95% CI 1·1-1·6) in the prophylaxis group and 2·6 (2·3-2·9) in the control group, giving an incidence rate ratio of 0·52 (0·44-0·61; p<0·0001), indicating a 48% reduction in UTI frequency after treatment with prophylaxis. Use of prophylaxis was well tolerated: we recorded 22 minor adverse events in the prophylaxis group related to antibiotic prophylaxis during the study, predominantly gastrointestinal disturbance (six participants), skin rash (six participants), and candidal infection (four participants). However, resistance against the antibiotics used for UTI treatment was more frequent in urinary isolates from the prophylaxis group than in those from the control group at 9-12 months of trial participation (nitrofurantoin 12 [24%] of 51 participants from the prophylaxis group vs six [9%] of 64 participants from the control group with at least one isolate; p=0·038), trimethoprim (34 [67%] of 51 vs 21 [33%] of 64; p=0·0003), and co-trimoxazole (26 [53%] of 49 vs 15 [24%] of 62; p=0·002).InterpretationContinuous antibiotic prophylaxis is effective in reducing UTI frequency in CISC users with recurrent UTIs, and it is well tolerated in these individuals. However, increased resistance of urinary bacteria is a concern that requires surveillance if prophylaxis is started.FundingUK National Institute for Health Research.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:To investigate if use of antibiotics was associated with bacterial complications following upper respiratory tract infections (URTIs). DESIGN:Ecological time-trend analysis and a prospective cohort study. SETTING:Primary, outpatient specialist and inpatient care in Stockholm County, Sweden. All analyses were based on administrative healthcare data on consultations, diagnoses and dispensed antibiotics from January 2006 to January 2016. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:Ecological time-trend analysis: 10-year trend analyses of the incidence of URTIs, bacterial infections/complications and respiratory antibiotic use. Prospective cohort study: Incidence of bacterial complications following URTIs in antibiotic-exposed and non-exposed patients. RESULTS:The utilisation of respiratory tract antibiotics decreased by 22% from 2006 to 2015, but no increased trend for mastoiditis (p=0.0933), peritonsillar abscess (p=0.0544), invasive group A streptococcal disease (p=0.3991), orbital abscess (p=0.9637), extradural and subdural abscesses (p=0.4790) and pansinusitis (p=0.3971) was observed. For meningitis and acute ethmoidal sinusitis, a decrease in the numbers of infections from 2006 to 2015 was observed (p=0.0038 and p=0.0003, respectively), and for retropharyngeal and parapharyngeal abscesses, an increase was observed (p=0.0214). Bacterial complications following URTIs were uncommon in both antibiotic-exposed (less than 1.5 per 10 000 episodes) and non-exposed patients (less than 1.3 per 10 000 episodes) with the exception of peritonsillar abscess after tonsillitis (risk per 10 000 tonsillitis episodes: 32.4 and 41.1 in patients with no antibiotic treatment and patients treated with antibiotics, respectively). CONCLUSIONS:Bacterial complications following URTIs are rare, and antibiotics may lack protective effect in preventing bacterial complications. Analyses of routinely collected administrative healthcare data can provide valuable information on the number of URTIs, antibiotic use and bacterial complications to patients, prescribers and policy-makers.

Project description:IntroductionRecurrent urinary tract infections (RUTIs) have a significant negative impact on quality of life and healthcare costs. To date, daily prophylactic antibiotics are the only treatment which have been shown to help prevent RUTIs. D-mannose is a type of sugar which is believed to inhibit bacterial adherence to uroepithelial cells, and is already being used by some women in an attempt to prevent RUTIs. There is currently insufficient rigorous evidence on which to base decisions about its use. The D-mannose to prevent recurrent urinary tract infections (MERIT) study will evaluate whether D-mannose is clinically and cost-effective in reducing frequency of infection and symptom burden for women presenting to UK primary care with RUTI.Methods and analysisMERIT will be a two-arm, individually randomised, double blind placebo controlled, pragmatic trial. Participants will be randomised to take D-mannose powder or placebo powder daily for 6 months. The primary outcome will be the number of medical attendances attributable to symptoms of RUTI. With 508 participants we will have 90% power to detect a 50% reduction in the chance of a further clinically suspected UTI, assuming 20% lost to follow-up. Secondary outcomes will include: number of days of moderately bad symptoms of UTI; time to next consultation; number of clinically suspected UTIs; number of microbiologically proven UTIs; number of antibiotic courses for UTI; quality of life and healthcare utilisation related to UTI. A within trial economic evaluation will be conducted to examine cost-effectiveness of D-mannose in comparison with placebo. A nested qualitative study will explore participants' experiences and perceptions of recruitment to, and participation in a study requiring a daily treatment.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval has been obtained from South West-Central Bristol Research Ethics Committee. Publication of the MERIT study is anticipated to occur in 2021.Trial registration numberISRCTN 13283516.

Project description:IntroductionDelayed prescribing can be a useful strategy to reduce antibiotic prescribing, but it is not clear for whom delayed prescribing might be effective. This protocol outlines an individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational cohort studies to explore the overall effect of delayed prescribing and identify key patient characteristics that are associated with efficacy of delayed prescribing.Methods and analysisA systematic search of the databases Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, EBSCO CINAHL Plus and Web of Science was conducted to identify relevant studies from inception to October 2017. Outcomes of interest include duration of illness, severity of illness, complication, reconsultation and patient satisfaction. Study authors of eligible papers will be contacted and invited to contribute raw IPD data. IPD data will be checked against published data, harmonised and aggregated to create one large IPD database. Multilevel regression will be performed to explore interaction effects between treatment allocation and patient characteristics. The economic evaluation will be conducted based on IPD from the combined trial and observational studies to estimate the differences in costs and effectiveness for delayed prescribing compared with normal practice. A decision model will be developed to assess potential savings and cost-effectiveness in terms of reduced antibiotic usage of delayed prescribing and quality-adjusted life years.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval was obtained from the University of Southampton Faculty of Medicine Research Ethics Committee (Reference number: 30068). Findings of this study will be published in peer-reviewed academic journals as well as General Practice trade journals and will be presented at national and international conferences. The results will have important public health implications, shaping the way in which antibiotics are prescribed in the future and to whom delayed prescriptions are issued.Prospero registration numberCRD42018079400.

Project description:ObjectiveTo estimate the effectiveness of different strategies involving delayed antibiotic prescription for acute respiratory tract infections.DesignOpen, pragmatic, parallel group, factorial, randomised controlled trial.SettingPrimary care in the United Kingdom.Patients889 patients aged 3 years and over with acute respiratory tract infection, recruited between 3 March 2010 and 28 March 2012 by 53 health professionals in 25 practices.InterventionsPatients judged not to need immediate antibiotics were randomised to undergo four strategies of delayed prescription: recontact for a prescription, post-dated prescription, collection of the prescription, and be given the prescription (patient led). During the trial, a strategy of no antibiotic prescription was added as another randomised comparison. Analysis was intention to treat.Main outcome measuresMean symptom severity (0-6 scale) at days 2-4 (primary outcome), antibiotic use, and patients' beliefs in the effectiveness of antibiotic use. Secondary analysis included comparison with immediate use of antibiotics.ResultsMean symptom severity had minimal differences between the strategies involving no prescription and delayed prescription (recontact, post-date, collection, patient led; 1.62, 1.60, 1.82, 1.68, 1.75, respectively; likelihood ratio test χ(2) 2.61, P=0.625). Duration of symptoms rated moderately bad or worse also did not differ between no prescription and delayed prescription strategies combined (median 3 days v 4 days; 4.29, P=0.368). There were modest and non-significant differences in patients very satisfied with the consultation between the randomised groups (79%, 74%, 80%, 88%, 89%, respectively; likelihood ratio test χ(2) 2.38, P=0.667), belief in antibiotics (71%, 74%, 73%, 72%, 66%; 1.62, P=0.805), or antibiotic use (26%, 37%, 37%, 33%, 39%; 4.96, P=0.292). By contrast, most patients given immediate antibiotics used antibiotics (97%) and strongly believed in them (93%), but with no benefit for symptom severity (score 1.76) or duration (median 4 days).ConclusionStrategies of no prescription or delayed antibiotic prescription result in fewer than 40% of patients using antibiotics, and are associated with less strong beliefs in antibiotics, and similar symptomatic outcomes to immediate prescription. If clear advice is given to patients, there is probably little to choose between the different strategies of delayed prescription.Trial registrationISRCTN38551726.