Evidence Hub

Evaluation of a molecular point-of-care testing for viral and atypical pathogens on intravenous antibiotic duration in hospitalized adults with lower respiratory tract infection: a randomized clinical trial

Shengchen D, Gu X, Fan G, Sun R, Wang Y, Yu D, Li H, Zhou F et al.

Clinical microbiology and infection : the official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, 2019

800 participants · 82 citations

Abstract

Objectives: The primary objective was to evaluate whether a molecular point-of-care test (POCT) for viral and atypical pathogens added to routine real-time PCR could reduce duration of intravenous antibiotics in hospitalized patients with lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI) compared with routine real-time PCR.

Methods: In this single-centre, open-label, randomized controlled study, we enrolled hospitalized adults diagnosed with LRTI. Patients were randomized to an intervention group (POCT FilmArray Panel for 20 viruses, atypical pathogens and bacteria plus routine real-time PCR) or a control group (routine real-time PCR for ten pathogens). The primary outcome was duration of intravenous antibiotics during hospitalization. The secondary outcomes included length of stay, cost of hospitalization and de-escalation within 72 hours and between 72 hours and 7 days. Intention-to-treat analysis was used.

Results: Between October 2017 and July 2018, we enrolled 800 eligible patients (398 in the intervention group and 402 in the control group). Duration of intravenous antibiotics in the intervention group was shorter than in the control (7.0 days (interquartile range (IQR) 5.0-9.0) versus 8.0 days (IQR 6.0-11.0); p <0.001). Length of hospital stay in the intervention group was significantly shorter (8.0 days (IQR 7.0-11.0) versus 9.0 days (IQR 7.0-12.0; p <0.001) and the cost of hospitalization in the intervention group was significantly lower ($1804.7 (IQR 1298.4-2633.8) versus…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 800 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free