Impact of Clinical Guidance & Point-of-care CRP in Children: the ARON Project (ARON)

• ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04470518
• Recruitment Status: Not yet recruiting
• First Posted: July 14, 2020
• Last Update Posted: January 6, 2021
• Sponsor: KU Leuven
• Collaborators: KCE; Universitaire Ziekenhuizen Leuven; University Ghent; Universiteit Antwerpen; University of Liege; VUB; Université Catholique de Louvain
• Information provided by (Responsible Party): Jan Verbakel, KU Leuven

Study Description

Brief Summary:

Impact of clinical guidance & point-of-care CRP test in children: the ARON project Trial Design: multicentre, cluster-randomized, parallel group pragmatic trial Trial Participants and setting: Children aged 6 months to 12 years of age with an acute illness episode presenting to in-hours general practice or out-of-hospital community paediatrics offices

Intervention(s) Diagnostic algorithm:

1. Clinical decision tree: clinician's gut feeling something is wrong, dyspnea, temperature ≥40ºC
2. YES to any : point-of-care CRP ≥5mg/L: additional testing or refer to secondary care <5mg/L: safety netting*, only prescribe antibiotics if advised (guidelines)

3. NO to all : are AB considered? YES : point-of-care CRP ≥5mg/L: safety netting*, only prescribe antibiotics if advised (guidelines) <5mg/L: safety netting*, do not prescribe antibiotics NO: safety netting

   *safety netting advice:

   • inform parents on what to expect and what to look out for
   • interactive parent information booklet based on previous research

   Control: Diagnosis and Treatment/Management as per usual care:

   - guidance on AB prescribing:

   o Belgische Commissie voor de Coördinatie van het Antibioticabeleid (BAPCOC) guide (updated November 2019)

   o RIZIV consensus meeting report "Antibiotics in children in ambulatory care"

   Primary Endpoint: Antibiotic prescribing rate at index consultation

   Secondary Endpoint(s)

   - time until full clinical recovery (during follow up (day 1 to day 30))

   - additional investigations (at index consultation and/or during follow up (day 1 to day 30))

   - re-consultation (during follow up (day 1 to day 30))

   - antibiotic prescribing rate (during follow up (day 1 to day 30))

   Exploratory endpoints at the index consultation:

   • additional investigations (X-Ray, blood tests, urine tests, etc.)

   During a follow-up period (day 1 to day 30):

   - referral to hospital

   - additional investigations (X-Ray, blood tests, urine tests, etc.)

   • patients with full clinical recovery at day 7 and day 30
   • admission to hospital
   • mortality
   • cost-effectiveness
   • patient satisfaction
   • qualitative study: endpoints

   Planned Sample Size: 6111 Timing of the intervention: Intervention at index consultation (at presentation to primary care) Follow-up duration: 30 days follow-up Duration of the trial (FPI-CSR): 33 months

Condition or disease	Intervention/treatment	Phase
Infection	Other: diagnostic algorithm	Not Applicable

Detailed Description:

The investigators aim to strengthen the assessment of acutely ill children in primary care, by introducing a diagnostic algorithm that can decrease antibiotic prescribing.

In light of the prior evidence and its results so far, the ARON trial will test the impact of a diagnostic algorithm including a standardised clinical assessment, a POC CRP test, and safety netting advice.

Therefore, the investigators propose to assess the clinical and cost-effectiveness of a diagnostic algorithm which includes a decision tree, POC CRP and safety netting advice in acutely ill children aged 6 months to 12 years of age presenting to ambulatory care, on AB prescribing, referral/admission to hospital, additional testing, mortality, and patient satisfaction.

More specifically, the investigators' research question is whether this diagnostic algorithm is able to safely reduce antibiotic prescribing in acutely ill children presenting to ambulatory care.

The decision whether or not to conduct a POC CRP test will depend on the standardized clinical assessment, i.e. a validated clinical decision tree, and subsequently for low-risk children on the intention to prescribe AB.

The investigators will provide clear evidence-based guidance on how to interpret the CRP test result as outlined below.

A process evaluation will examine how clinicians use CRP testing in their practice and how parents experience these consultations.

The investigators propose a study, where children (6 months to 12 years of age) will be randomised to (a) a diagnostic algorithm with CRP testing and specific guidance on when to prescribe AB or (b) usual care. CRP testing will be done using a finger prick test (result within 4 minutes). The CRP level will then be given to the clinician who will communicate the result to the child/parents.

The investigators aim to recruit 6111 children and will collect data registered by the participating physician, from the child's health record and children/parents directly. The investigators will describe how the intervention has worked in practice and how clinicians/parents have experienced these consultations.

Guidance will be part of a diagnostic algorithm which includes clinically guided POC CRP testing and safety netting advice to inform parents on what to expect and what to look out for.

Individual interviews will be conducted with clinicians and parents taking part in the trial within 30 days after the first contact consultation, to explore the social processes influencing embedding of the intervention within practice, and behaviour change techniques.

These individual telephone interviews will be performed with a selection of parents to address whether their concerns were discussed appropriately and whether their expectations were met and how they experienced the consultation and/or POC CRP testing.

The safety-netting advice will be supported by a parent information booklet, based on previous research (the "When should I worry"-interactive booklet (a guide to Coughs, Colds, Earache & Sore Throats), the "Mijn kind heeft koorts" booklet (Eefje de Bont, www.thuisarts.nl), and the "Caring for children with coughs"-leaflet (information about how to look after a child who has a cough and when to see the doctor)).

The findings of this study could change the practice of ambulatory care physicians and might be of great interest to parents and childcare providers. The investigators will publish the findings of this research in academic journals, present at national conferences and discuss results with groups responsible for the national guidance on how to assess acutely ill children (Domus Medica, SSMG).

Study Design

• Study Type: Interventional (Clinical Trial)
• Estimated Enrollment: 6111 participants
• Allocation: Randomized
• Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment
• Intervention Model Description: multicentre, cluster-randomized, parallel group pragmatic trial
• Masking: None (Open Label)
• Masking Description: Owing to study procedures, children, their parents and physicians will not be masked to the practices' random allocation.
• Primary Purpose: Other
• Official Title: Impact of a Diagnostic Algorithm on Antibiotic Prescribing Rate and Further Management of Acutely Ill Children Presenting to Ambulatory Care: Multicentre, Cluster-randomized, Parallel Group Pragmatic Trial
• Estimated Study Start Date: January 6, 2021
• Estimated Primary Completion Date: December 1, 2022
• Estimated Study Completion Date: June 1, 2023

Arms and Interventions

Arm	Intervention/treatment
Active Comparator: Intervention: Diagnostic algorithm; diagnostic algorithm including a standardised clinical assessment, a Point-of-care C-reactive protein test, and safety netting advice	Other: diagnostic algorithm; Guidance will be part of a diagnostic algorithm which includes clinically guided point-of-care C-reactive protein testing and safety netting advice to inform parents on what to expect and what to look out for. A selection of clinical features will be assessed and recorded by the physician in the patient's health record and on the e-CRF, including the clinical decision tree (clinician's gut feeling, body temperature, dypnoea). The safety-netting advice will be supported by a parent information booklet, based on previous research (the "When should I worry"-interactive booklet (a guide to Coughs, Colds, Earache & Sore Throats), the "Mijn kind heeft koorts" booklet (Eefje de Bont, www.thuisarts.nl), and the "Caring for children with coughs"-leaflet (information about how to look after a child who has a cough and when to see the doctor)).
No Intervention: Usual care; In the control arm, patients will receive 'usual care' left at the discretion of the treating physician. Apart from the general training session for all participating physicians they have attended prior to recruitment and randomization, physicians in the control arm will not receive additional tools. They are expected (but not forced) to follow the Belgian guidelines (as described in "BAPCOC National guidelines and the RIZIV consensus meeting "Rational use of antibiotics in children").

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures :

1. antibiotic prescribing rate at index consultation (immediate or delayed) [ Time Frame: This outcome will be registered immediately at the index consultation (immediately after the intervention) ]
   The primary outcome is the proportion of subjects who were prescribed antibiotic treatment (both immediate and delayed) at the index consultation as recorded by the treating physician.

Secondary Outcome Measures :

1. Clinical recovery during follow-up [ Time Frame: This outcome will be checked from the diary (via app for parents) from first day after the intervention until day of full clinical recovery (up to maximum 30 days after after the intervention) ]
   the duration (in days) until reaching full clinical recovery
2. Additional investigations at index consultation and/or during follow-up [ Time Frame: This composite outcome will be registered immediately after the intervention and/or checked from the patient health record from the first day to day 30 after the intervention ]
   - the proportion of subjects receiving additional testing (including, but not limited to (X-Ray, blood tests, urine tests) at index consultation (day 0) and/or during follow-up (day 1 to day 30)
3. Re-consultation during follow-up [ Time Frame: This outcome will be checked from the patient health record from first day to day 30 after the intervention ]
   - the proportion of subjects who re-consulted their physician during follow-up (day 1 to day 30)
4. Antibiotic prescribing rate during follow-up [ Time Frame: This outcome will be checked from the patient health record first day to day 30 after the intervention ]
   - the proportion of subjects who were prescribed antibiotic treatment during follow-up (day 1 to day 30)

Other Outcome Measures:

1. additional testing at index consultation [ Time Frame: immediately after the intervention ]
   the proportion of subjects receiving additional testing (including, but not limited to (X-Ray, blood tests, urine tests) at index consultation (day 0)
2. additional testing during follow-up [ Time Frame: during follow-up from first day to day 30 after the intervention ]
   the proportion of subjects receiving additional testing (including, but not limited to (X-Ray, blood tests, urine tests) during follow-up (day 1 to day 30)
3. referral to hospital at day 0 [ Time Frame: immediately after the intervention ]
   the proportion of subjects referred to hospital at index consultation (day 0)
4. referral to hospital during follow-up [ Time Frame: during follow-up from first day to day 30 after the intervention ]
   the proportion of subjects referred to hospital during follow-up (day 1 to day 30)
5. admission to hospital at day 0 [ Time Frame: immediately after the intervention ]
   the proportion of subjects admitted to hospital at index consultation (day 0)
6. admission to hospital during follow-up [ Time Frame: during follow-up from first day to day 30 after the intervention ]
   the proportion of subjects admitted to hospital during follow-up (day 1 to day 30)
7. mortality at day 0 [ Time Frame: immediately after the intervention ]
   the proportion of subjects who died at index consultation (day 0)
8. mortality during follow up [ Time Frame: during follow-up from first day to day 30 after the intervention ]
   the proportion of subjects who died during follow-up (day 1 to day 30)
9. clinical recovery at day 7 [ Time Frame: at day 7 after the intervention ]
   the proportion of subjects with full clinical recovery at day 7
10. clinical recovery at day 30 [ Time Frame: at day 30 after the intervention ]
    the proportion of subjects with full clinical recovery at day 30
11. patient's experience through semi-structured interviews [ Time Frame: within 7 days after the intervention ]
    Patient's experience through semi-structured interviews with pre-defined topic guide
12. Parent's experience through semi-structured interviews [ Time Frame: within 7 days after the intervention ]
    Parent's experience through semi-structured interviews with pre-defined topic guide
13. Physician's experience through semi-structured interviews [ Time Frame: within 7 days after the intervention ]
    Physician's experience through semi-structured interviews with pre-defined topic guide
14. Cost-effectiveness of the intervention [ Time Frame: will be assessed retrospectively after data collection has finished (24 months of recruitment) ]
    Cost-effectiveness of the intervention: healthcare expenditures in terms of hospitalization, consultations, pharmaceuticals (reimbursed and non-reimbursed), productivity, quality of life
15. Adherence to the diagnostic algorithm [ Time Frame: immediately after the intervention ]
    proportion of consultation in which the physician did not adhere to the diagnostic algorithm

Eligibility Criteria

• Ages Eligible for Study: 6 Months to 12 Years (Child)
• Sexes Eligible for Study: All
• Accepts Healthy Volunteers: No

Criteria

Inclusion Criteria for practices:

• Being able to recruit acutely ill children (ideally consecutively)
• Agree to the terms of the clinical study agreement.

Exclusion Criteria for practices:

• Currently using a POC CRP device as part of their routine care
• No practices will be excluded on other grounds than the above. Age, demographics, geographic region will not be used to exclude eligible practices. This will provide us with a real-life, representative subset of ambulatory care physicians.

Inclusion criteria for children

• Children aged 6 months to 12 years, provided informed consent can be obtained
• presenting with an acute illness episode that started maximum 10 days before the index consultation

Exclusion criteria for children

• Children who were previously included in this trial
• children with an underlying known chronic condition (e.g. asthma, immune deficiency)
• clinically unstable warranting immediate care
• immunosuppressant medication taken in the previous 30 days
• trauma as the main presenting problem
• antibiotics taken in the previous 7 days
• Unwillingness or inability to provide informed consent

Contacts and Locations

Contacts

Contact: Tine De Burghgraeve, PhD; +3216 37 76 72; tine.deburghgraeve@kuleuven.be

Sponsors and Collaborators

KU Leuven

KCE

Universitaire Ziekenhuizen Leuven

University Ghent

Universiteit Antwerpen

University of Liege

VUB

Université Catholique de Louvain

Investigators

• Principal Investigator: Jan Y Verbakel, MD, PhD; KU Leuven

More Information

Publications:

Verbakel JY, Lemiengre MB, De Burghgraeve T, De Sutter A, Aertgeerts B, Bullens DMA, Shinkins B, Van den Bruel A, Buntinx F. Point-of-care C reactive protein to identify serious infection in acutely ill children presenting to hospital: prospective cohort study. Arch Dis Child. 2018 May;103(5):420-426. doi: 10.1136/archdischild-2016-312384. Epub 2017 Dec 21.

Verbakel JY, Aertgeerts B, Lemiengre M, Sutter AD, Bullens DM, Buntinx F. Analytical accuracy and user-friendliness of the Afinion point-of-care CRP test. J Clin Pathol. 2014 Jan;67(1):83-6. doi: 10.1136/jclinpath-2013-201654. Epub 2013 Sep 11.

Verbakel JY, Lemiengre MB, De Burghgraeve T, De Sutter A, Aertgeerts B, Shinkins B, Perera R, Mant D, Van den Bruel A, Buntinx F. Should all acutely ill children in primary care be tested with point-of-care CRP: a cluster randomised trial. BMC Med. 2016 Oct 6;14(1):131. doi: 10.1186/s12916-016-0679-2. Erratum in: BMC Med. 2017 May 2;15(1):93.

• Responsible Party: Jan Verbakel, Professor Doctor, KU Leuven
• ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04470518
• Other Study ID Numbers: S62005
• First Posted: July 14, 2020
• Last Update Posted: January 6, 2021
• Last Verified: January 2021

Individual Participant Data (IPD) Sharing Statement:

• Plan to Share IPD: No

• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Drug Product: No
• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Device Product: No

Keywords provided by Jan Verbakel, KU Leuven:

antibiotic prescription; infections; decision tree; point-of-care C-reactive protein test; safetynet advice

Additional relevant MeSH terms:

Infection