CoughNCT00221351
C-reactive Protein (CRP)-Guided Management Algorithm for Adults With Acute Cough
A study testing CRP point of care testing in people with Cough, run by University of California, San Francisco at 2 sites in United States.
Trial summary
We aim to evaluate the impact of a CRP-guided management algorithm for adults with acute cough illness. More specifically, we will examine both process of care and clinical outcomes: 1. Processes of care (i.e., chest x-rays ordered, antibiotic treatment, length-of-time in the ED). Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Cough
- What is being tested?
- CRP point of care testing
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- How many people
- 139 participants
- Where
- 2 sitesUnited States
- Study dates
- Oct 2005to Jul 2006
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Adults (age > 18 years) seeking care for an acute respiratory illness (duration < 10 days) in which cough is a chief complaint.
- Eligible patients will be required to have at least 1 symptom of acute respiratory tract infection (fever, night sweats, rhinorrhea, sinus congestion, myalgias).
Who cannot join
- Previous (within 21 days) antibiotic treatment;
- immunodeficiency;
- cystic fibrosis;
- patient requiring immediate evaluation/management;
- inability to provide informed consent.
Trial locations and contacts
2 sites in 1 country.
United States2 sites
Truman Medical Center
Kansas City, Missouri, 64108
Veterans Affairs Medical Center
Kansas City, Missouri, 64128
About this study
Official title: A Randomized, Controlled Trial of a C-reactive Protein (CRP)-Guided Management Algorithm for Adults With Acute Cough Illness in the Emergency Department
We aim to evaluate the impact of a CRP-guided management algorithm for adults with acute cough illness. More specifically, we will examine both process of care and clinical outcomes:
- Processes of care (i.e., chest x-rays ordered, antibiotic treatment, length-of-time in the ED). We hypothesize that CRP-guided management will be associated with a decrease in the antibiotic prescription for acute cough illness from 50 percent to 30 percent.
- Clinical outcomes (i.e., duration of illness, any return visit, return visit with a diagnosis of pneumonia, hospitalization, subsequent antibiotic use, satisfaction with care). We hypothesize that there will be no difference in the proportion of patients feeling back to normal within 2 weeks of their ED visit for acute cough illness (about 60 percent, 95% confidence interval=50 to 70 percent).
Read the detailed description
We have developed a CRP-guided management algorithm based on recent studies in which the accuracy of CRP for identifying patients with pneumonia was confirmed.(10;11) Importantly, these 2 studies each confirmed that CRP levels provide additional diagnostic support beyond that gained from application of clinical prediction rules. In the proposed study, we will recommend that physicians first assess the probability of pneumonia based on clinical findings, in accordance with current practice recommendations as follows: 1) Low Clinical Suspicion (<5% probability of pneumonia): Absence of fever (T>38C), tachycardia (HR>100), or tachypnea (RR>24), and normal chest examination. These patients should receive symptomatic therapy, and do not require CXR or antibiotic treatment; 2) High Clinical Suspicion (>30% probability of pneumonia): At least 1 abnormal vital sign and abnormal chest examination. These patients receive CXR and antibiotics based on CXR findings or high clinical suspicion; 3) Intermediate Clinical Suspicion (5-30%): All others. Current practice guidelines recommend considering CXR in these patients, however no further guidance is provided for the management of these patients.
After assessing the clinical probability of pneumonia, CRP levels will be provided for a random subset of patients. A CRP level <10 mg/L corresponds with a very low probability of bacterial pneumonia. Thus, for patients with low and intermediate-probability of pneumonia based on clinical grounds, a CRP <10 mg/L should confirm that no CXR or antibiotics are necessary in routine cases (See attached algorithm). A CRP level > 100 mg/L corresponds with a substantially elevated probability of pneumonia. Thus, for patients with low and intermediate-probability of pneumonia based on clinical grounds, a CRP >100 mg/L would support CXR ordering, and for patients with high clinical suspicion, antibiotic therapy should be considered regardless of the CXR result (since studies show that CXR misses about 10% of community-acquired pneumonia confirmed with follow-up CXR or chest computed tomography). Overall, the addition of CRP test results would reduce the need for CXR ordering and antibiotic therapy in cases with an intermediate clinical probability of pneumonia and a low CRP level; and increase the need for CXR ordering and possibly antibiotic therapy in cases with intermediate or high clinical probability of pneumonia and a high CRP level. In this way, we hypothesize that the CRP-guided management algorithm will improve the proportion of patients with acute cough illness who receive appropriate diagnostic and therapeutic interventions in the ED.
We suspect that most patients with clinically apparent pneumonia will have high CRP levels. However, pneumonia can be a difficult diagnosis to make when patients present with atypical clinical manifestations (e.g. the elderly or COPD patients), or in practice settings where radiography is not readily available. In these settings, the addition of CRP testing may help identify a small number of pneumonia cases that might otherwise go undetected and result in delays in appropriate care. In the large number of patients with intermediate probability of pneumonia, such as adults with acute cough illness who have abnormal vital signs, but normal examinations, particularly in RSV and influenza season, a CRP level < 10 mg/L could provide clinically significant reassurance to refrain from further testing or empiric antibiotic treatment. A normal CRP level may also provide support to clinicians who are receiving pressure from patients to prescribe antibiotics when they are not clinically indicated. Indirect or future benefits to society are possible if research results show that CRP-guided management strategies can decrease the costs of health care.
Randomization using a random number generator will be conducted by investigators at the data coordinating center (Philadelphia, PA), and results placed in sequentially number study packets. The study personnel that enroll patients will be blinded to the randomization result until after the patient has provided informed consent to participate in the study.
Interventions
- Staff Educational Seminar: Prior to beginning the study, all staff will be informed about the performance characteristics of CRP in adults with acute cough illness, and current clinical practice recommendations regarding evaluation and treatment of acute cough illness, particularly acute bronchitis.
- CRP-Guided Algorithm: Study subjects randomized to the CRP-guided management algorithm will have a point-of-care CRP test performed shortly after triage using a finger-stick specimen. The result, along with a printed management algorithm for interpreting the CRP level (see Appendix), will be placed in the chart. The general guidelines for interpreting CRP levels will be as described above.
Human Subjects Procedures
- Recruitment and Initial Contact Method. As described above, appropriate patients will be referred to study personnel by the triage nurse. Initial contact and informed consent will be conducted in a discrete manner, and in a private setting.
- Informed consent. Will be obtained from study personnel that have been trained in Human Subjects Protection. The time involved for the research subject in obtaining informed consent is about 10 minutes.
- CRP measurement. A finger-stick blood test will be performed using the NycoCard II Reader (Axis-Shield, Norway). See testing instrument description in Appendix. The US FDA has approved the diagnostic test kit as one of moderate complexity for these specific circumstances. The CRP test will not be billed to the patient. The time involved for the research subject in performing the CRP test is about 10 minutes.
- Chart abstraction. The Chart Abstraction instrument will resemble that used in the baseline periods (11/03-2/04 and 11/04-2/05) of the currently IRB-approved study with the following modification, except that we will also abstract findings from the physical examination portion of the medical record relating to the chest examination.
- Telephone follow-up survey. Study subjects will be contacted by telephone 2-4 weeks following their emergency department visit by trained research staff using the same telephone survey instrument used in the baseline period (already approved). The time involved for the research subject in completing the telephone survey is about 10 minutes.
- Conditions
- Cough
- Being tested
- CRP point of care testing
- Keywords
- cough, acute bronchitis, upper respiratory tract infection, pneumonia, lower respiratory tract infection
- Medical subject headings
- Cough, Bronchitis, Respiratory Tract Infections, Pneumonia
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
CRP point of care testingProcedure or surgery
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Chest X-ray utilization, Antibiotic treatment, Time in emergency department, Subsequent office or emergency department visits (within 2 weeks; Subsequent hospitalization, Time-to-illness resolution
Secondary outcomes (1)
Satisfaction with care
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted22 Sep 2005 (estimated)
- Study startOct 2005
- Primary completionMar 2006
- Study completionJul 2006
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for CoughStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by University of California, San FranciscoThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 139 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of California, San Francisco
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- US Department of Veterans Affairs, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ)
- Investigators
- Ralph Gonzales, MD, Principal investigator, University of California, San FranciscoJoshua Metlay, MD, Principal investigator, VAMC Pittsburgh
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00221351
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- CRP-1
- Other IDs
- IMPAACT- AHRQ/ VAMC
- Status last verified
- May 2011
- First submitted
- 19 Sep 2005
- Last updated
- 23 May 2011
- Results posted
- No
Publications
Smedemark SA, Aabenhus R, Llor C, Fournaise A, Olsen O, Jorgensen KJ. Biomarkers as point-of-care tests to guide prescription of antibiotics in people with acute respiratory infections in primary care. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Oct 17;10(10):CD010130. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010130.pub3.
PubMed 36250577
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 23 May 2011. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- A Randomized, Controlled Trial of a C-reactive Protein (CRP)-Guided Management Algorithm for Adults With Acute Cough Illness in the Emergency Department
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00221351
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- CRP-1
- Conditions
- Cough
- Keywords
- cough, acute bronchitis, upper respiratory tract infection, pneumonia, lower respiratory tract infection
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 139 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of California, San FranciscoUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- US Department of Veterans Affairs, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ)
- Study start
- Oct 2005
- Primary completion
- Mar 2006 (actual)
- Study completion
- Jul 2006 (actual)
- First posted
- 22 Sep 2005 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
We aim to evaluate the impact of a CRP-guided management algorithm for adults with acute cough illness. More specifically, we will examine both process of care and clinical outcomes:
- Processes of care (i.e., chest x-rays ordered, antibiotic treatment, length-of-time in the ED). We hypothesize that CRP-guided management will be associated with a decrease in the antibiotic prescription for acute cough illness from 50 percent to 30 percent.
- Clinical outcomes (i.e., duration of illness, any return visit, return visit with a diagnosis of pneumonia, hospitalization, subsequent antibiotic use, satisfaction with care). We hypothesize that there will be no difference in the proportion of patients feeling back to normal within 2 weeks of their ED visit for acute cough illness (about 60 percent, 95% confidence interval=50 to 70 percent).
Detailed description
We have developed a CRP-guided management algorithm based on recent studies in which the accuracy of CRP for identifying patients with pneumonia was confirmed.(10;11) Importantly, these 2 studies each confirmed that CRP levels provide additional diagnostic support beyond that gained from application of clinical prediction rules. In the proposed study, we will recommend that physicians first assess the probability of pneumonia based on clinical findings, in accordance with current practice recommendations as follows: 1) Low Clinical Suspicion (<5% probability of pneumonia): Absence of fever (T>38C), tachycardia (HR>100), or tachypnea (RR>24), and normal chest examination. These patients should receive symptomatic therapy, and do not require CXR or antibiotic treatment; 2) High Clinical Suspicion (>30% probability of pneumonia): At least 1 abnormal vital sign and abnormal chest examination. These patients receive CXR and antibiotics based on CXR findings or high clinical suspicion; 3) Intermediate Clinical Suspicion (5-30%): All others. Current practice guidelines recommend considering CXR in these patients, however no further guidance is provided for the management of these patients.
After assessing the clinical probability of pneumonia, CRP levels will be provided for a random subset of patients. A CRP level <10 mg/L corresponds with a very low probability of bacterial pneumonia. Thus, for patients with low and intermediate-probability of pneumonia based on clinical grounds, a CRP <10 mg/L should confirm that no CXR or antibiotics are necessary in routine cases (See attached algorithm). A CRP level > 100 mg/L corresponds with a substantially elevated probability of pneumonia. Thus, for patients with low and intermediate-probability of pneumonia based on clinical grounds, a CRP >100 mg/L would support CXR ordering, and for patients with high clinical suspicion, antibiotic therapy should be considered regardless of the CXR result (since studies show that CXR misses about 10% of community-acquired pneumonia confirmed with follow-up CXR or chest computed tomography). Overall, the addition of CRP test results would reduce the need for CXR ordering and antibiotic therapy in cases with an intermediate clinical probability of pneumonia and a low CRP level; and increase the need for CXR ordering and possibly antibiotic therapy in cases with intermediate or high clinical probability of pneumonia and a high CRP level. In this way, we hypothesize that the CRP-guided management algorithm will improve the proportion of patients with acute cough illness who receive appropriate diagnostic and therapeutic interventions in the ED.
We suspect that most patients with clinically apparent pneumonia will have high CRP levels. However, pneumonia can be a difficult diagnosis to make when patients present with atypical clinical manifestations (e.g. the elderly or COPD patients), or in practice settings where radiography is not readily available. In these settings, the addition of CRP testing may help identify a small number of pneumonia cases that might otherwise go undetected and result in delays in appropriate care. In the large number of patients with intermediate probability of pneumonia, such as adults with acute cough illness who have abnormal vital signs, but normal examinations, particularly in RSV and influenza season, a CRP level < 10 mg/L could provide clinically significant reassurance to refrain from further testing or empiric antibiotic treatment. A normal CRP level may also provide support to clinicians who are receiving pressure from patients to prescribe antibiotics when they are not clinically indicated. Indirect or future benefits to society are possible if research results show that CRP-guided management strategies can decrease the costs of health care.
Randomization using a random number generator will be conducted by investigators at the data coordinating center (Philadelphia, PA), and results placed in sequentially number study packets. The study personnel that enroll patients will be blinded to the randomization result until after the patient has provided informed consent to participate in the study.
Interventions
- Staff Educational Seminar: Prior to beginning the study, all staff will be informed about the performance characteristics of CRP in adults with acute cough illness, and current clinical practice recommendations regarding evaluation and treatment of acute cough illness, particularly acute bronchitis.
- CRP-Guided Algorithm: Study subjects randomized to the CRP-guided management algorithm will have a point-of-care CRP test performed shortly after triage using a finger-stick specimen. The result, along with a printed management algorithm for interpreting the CRP level (see Appendix), will be placed in the chart. The general guidelines for interpreting CRP levels will be as described above.
Human Subjects Procedures
- Recruitment and Initial Contact Method. As described above, appropriate patients will be referred to study personnel by the triage nurse. Initial contact and informed consent will be conducted in a discrete manner, and in a private setting.
- Informed consent. Will be obtained from study personnel that have been trained in Human Subjects Protection. The time involved for the research subject in obtaining informed consent is about 10 minutes.
- CRP measurement. A finger-stick blood test will be performed using the NycoCard II Reader (Axis-Shield, Norway). See testing instrument description in Appendix. The US FDA has approved the diagnostic test kit as one of moderate complexity for these specific circumstances. The CRP test will not be billed to the patient. The time involved for the research subject in performing the CRP test is about 10 minutes.
- Chart abstraction. The Chart Abstraction instrument will resemble that used in the baseline periods (11/03-2/04 and 11/04-2/05) of the currently IRB-approved study with the following modification, except that we will also abstract findings from the physical examination portion of the medical record relating to the chest examination.
- Telephone follow-up survey. Study subjects will be contacted by telephone 2-4 weeks following their emergency department visit by trained research staff using the same telephone survey instrument used in the baseline period (already approved). The time involved for the research subject in completing the telephone survey is about 10 minutes.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Adults (age > 18 years) seeking care for an acute respiratory illness (duration < 10 days) in which cough is a chief complaint.
- Eligible patients will be required to have at least 1 symptom of acute respiratory tract infection (fever, night sweats, rhinorrhea, sinus congestion, myalgias).
Key exclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Previous (within 21 days) antibiotic treatment;
- immunodeficiency;
- cystic fibrosis;
- patient requiring immediate evaluation/management;
- inability to provide informed consent.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| CRP point of care testing | Procedure or surgery | – |
Primary outcome
Chest X-ray utilization, Antibiotic treatment, Time in emergency department, Subsequent office or emergency department visits (within 2 weeks; Subsequent hospitalization, Time-to-illness resolution
1 secondary outcome
Satisfaction with care
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 23 May 2011.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 36250577Smedemark SA, Aabenhus R, Llor C, Fournaise A, Olsen O, Jorgensen KJ. Biomarkers as point-of-care tests to guide prescription of antibiotics in people with acute respiratory infections in primary care. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Oct 17;10(10):CD010130. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010130.pub3.
Related trials for Cough
RecruitingPhase 2
A Phase II Clinical Trial of Absorbed Acellular Pertussis (Two-Component) Diphtheria-Tetanus Combined Vaccine (For Adults and Adolescents)
Pertussis (Whooping Cough), Diphtheria
RecruitingPhase 1/2
A Phase I/II Clinical Trial of the Diphtheria, Tetanus, Acellular Component Pertussis and Sabin Inactivated Poliomyelitis Vaccine Adsorbed
Diphtheria, Pertussis
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Assessment of the Acceptability of, and Factors Associated With, Recommended Vaccinations During Pregnancy in Maternity Units in the Ile-de-France Region
Vaccination Coverage Among Pregnant Women
Not yet recruitingPhase 4
A 2x2 Factorial, Randomized, Open-label Trial to Evaluate Neuromodulators and Cough Control Therapy in Patients With Refractory or Unexplained Chronic Cough
Cough, Refractory Chronic Cough
Not yet recruiting
Optimizing Dysphagia Treatment Delivery in Acute Care: A Hybrid Efficacy Implementation Trial
Dysphagia, Critical Illness
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Ralph Gonzales, MD principal investigator
University of California, San Francisco
Joshua Metlay, MD principal investigator
VAMC Pittsburgh
2 sites in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing CRP point of care testing in people with Cough, run by University of California, San Francisco at 2 sites in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 2 inclusion and 5 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 23 May 2011. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 2 sites in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Chest X-ray utilization, Antibiotic treatment, Time in emergency department, Subsequent office or emergency department visits (within 2 weeks; Subsequent hospitalization, Time-to-illness resolution. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT00221351, which also lists 1 linked publication.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 23 May 2011.