Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38015833›Full record

Trial reportPLoS medicine2023

Evaluation of point-of-care multiplex polymerase chain reaction in guiding antibiotic treatment of patients acutely admitted with suspected community-acquired pneumonia in Denmark: A multicentre randomised controlled trial.

Mariana Bichuette Cartuliares, Flemming Schønning Rosenvinge, Christian Backer Mogensen, Thor Aage Skovsted, Steen Lomborg Andersen, Claus Østergaard, Andreas Kristian Pedersen, Helene Skjøt-Arkil

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialMulticenter StudyEquivalence Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PLoS medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04651712 (The Effect of a Point-of-care Sputum Specimen Assay on Antibiotic Treatment of Patients Admitted Acutely With Suspected Pneumonia), which is not on this map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed
8.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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.

NCT04651712 nacompletednot on this map

The Effect of a Point-of-care Sputum Specimen Assay on Antibiotic Treatment of Patients Admitted Acutely With Suspected Pneumonia: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of Southern DenmarkRan2021 to 2022Enrolled290ConditionsPneumonia, BacterialArmsPOC-PCR
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Impact of point-of-care multiplex PCR for Mycoplasma pneumoniae community-acquired pneumonia in the emergency department.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Rapid commercial CTX-M diagnostics: Performance, limitations and clinical impact.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2026
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Mariana Bichuette CartuliaresDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University Hospital of Southern Denmark, Aabenraa, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0003-0923-6960
Flemming Schønning RosenvingeDepartment of Clinical Microbiology, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0003-2129-328X
Christian Backer MogensenDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University Hospital of Southern Denmark, Aabenraa, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-8254-089X
Thor Aage SkovstedDepartment of Biochemistry and Immunology, University Hospital of Southern Denmark, Aabenraa, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0003-3147-3030
Steen Lomborg AndersenDepartment of Clinical Microbiology, University Hospital of Southern Denmark, Aabenraa, Denmark.ORCID 0009-0009-2157-6555
Claus ØstergaardDepartment of Clinical Microbiology, Lillebaelt Hospital, Vejle, Denmark.
Andreas Kristian PedersenDepartment of Clinical Research, University Hospital of Southern Denmark, Aabenraa, Denmark.
Helene Skjøt-ArkilDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University Hospital of Southern Denmark, Aabenraa, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-2236-6375
University of Southern Denmark · DKLillebaelt Hospital · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRapid and accurate detection of pathogens is needed in community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) to enable appropriate antibiotics and to slow the development of antibiotic resistance. We aimed to compare the effect of point-of-care (POC) polymerase chain reaction (PCR) detection of respiratory pathogens added to standard care with standard care only (SCO) on antibiotic prescriptions after acute hospital admission. METHODS AND

findingsWe performed a superiority, parallel-group, open-label, multicentre, randomised controlled trial (RCT) in 3 Danish medical emergency departments (EDs) from March 2021 to February 2022. Adults acutely admitted with suspected CAP during the daytime on weekdays were included and randomly assigned (1:1) to POC-PCR (The Biofire FilmArray Pneumonia Panel plus added to standard care) or SCO (routine culture and, if requested by the attending physician, target-specific PCR) analysis of respiratory samples. We randomly assigned 294 patients with successfully collected samples (tracheal secretion 78.4% or expectorated sputum 21.6%) to POC-PCR (n = 148, 50.4%) or SCO (146, 49.6%). Patients and investigators owning the data were blinded to the allocation and test results. Outcome adjudicators and clinical staff at the ED were not blinded to allocation and test results but were together with the statistician, blinded to data management and analysis. Laboratory staff performing standard care analyses was blinded to allocation. The study coordinator was not blinded. Intention-to-treat and per protocol analysis were performed using logistic regression with Huber-White clustered standard errors for the prescription of antibiotic treatment. Loss to follow-up comprises 3 patients in the POC-PCR (2%) and none in the SCO group. Intention-to-treat analysis showed no difference in the primary outcome of prescriptions of no or narrow-spectrum antibiotics at 4 h after admission for the POC-PCR (n = 91, 62.8%) odds ratio (OR) 1.13; (95% confidence interval (CI) [0.96, 1.34] p = 0.134) and SCO (n = 87, 59.6%). Secondary outcomes showed that prescriptions were significantly more targeted at 4-h OR 5.68; (95% CI [2.49, 12.94] p < 0.001) and 48-h OR 4.20; (95% CI [1.87, 9.40] p < 0.001) and more adequate at 48-h OR 2.11; (95% CI [1.23, 3.61] p = 0.006) and on day 5 in the POC-PCR group OR 1.40; (95% CI [1.18, 1.66] p < 0.001). There was no difference between the groups in relation to intensive care unit (ICU) admissions OR 0.54; (95% CI [0.10, 2.91] p = 0.475), readmission within 30 days OR 0.90; (95% CI [0.43, 1.86] p = 0.787), length of stay (LOS) IRR 0.82; (95% CI [0.63, 1.07] p = 0.164), 30 days mortality OR 1.24; (95% CI [0.32, 4.82] p = 0.749), and in-hospital mortality OR 0.98; (95% CI [0.19, 5.06] p = 0.986).

conclusionsIn a setting with an already restrictive use of antibiotics, adding POC-PCR to the diagnostic setup did not increase the number of patients treated with narrow-spectrum or without antibiotics. POC-PCR may result in a more targeted and adequate use of antibiotics. A significant study limitation was the concurrent Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic resulting in an unusually low transmission of respiratory virus.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04651712).

Indexed as

COVID-19Point-of-Care SystemsAdultAnti-Bacterial AgentsCOVID-19 TestingDenmarkHumansMultiplex Polymerase Chain ReactionAnti-Bacterial Agents

Identifiers

PMID38015833
PMCPMC10684013
OpenAlexW4389081990

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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 Socratic graph.