search
Back to results

Optimal Collection of Specimens of the Lower Respiratory Tract

Primary Purpose

Respiratory Tract Infections

Status
Completed
Phase
Not Applicable
Locations
Denmark
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
Forced expiratory technique and induced sputum
Tracheal suction
Sponsored by
University of Southern Denmark
About
Eligibility
Locations
Arms
Outcomes
Full info

About this trial

This is an interventional diagnostic trial for Respiratory Tract Infections

Eligibility Criteria

18 Years - undefined (Adult, Older Adult)All SexesDoes not accept healthy volunteers

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Patients admitted with suspected lower respiratory tract infection
  • Patients > 18 years old
  • One of the following symptoms: dyspnea, cough, expectoration, fever and chest tightness

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Patients transferred directly to ICU
  • If the attending physician considers emergency treatment is needed
  • Patients receiving prednisolone treatment of 20mg/day or more over the last 2 weeks
  • Patient which consent cannot be obtained

Sites / Locations

  • Hospital of Southern Jutland

Arms of the Study

Arm 1

Arm 2

Arm Type

Active Comparator

Experimental

Arm Label

Tracheal suction

Forced expiratory technique and induced sputum

Arm Description

Uses the local standard procedure of tracheal suction to obtain secretions from the lower respiratory tract

This procedure is without suction. The patient's attempts to deliver a sputum sample after forced exhalation and coughing technique. Regardless of the result the patient then receives hypertonic saline by an inhalation mask to induce the sputum. If the patient cannot deliver a sample, tracheal suction will be performed in order to obtain a specimen for the analyses.

Outcomes

Primary Outcome Measures

Quality of specimen from the lower respiratory tract
Unsuitable (bad quality) measured by microscopy - > 10 squamous epithelial cells per low power field of view (x10). Suitable (good quality) measured by microscopy - Samples with < 10 squamous epithelial cells per low power field of view

Secondary Outcome Measures

Patient clinical symptoms
The patients are asked about 4 specific symptoms (Cough, Expectoration, Chest pain and Dyspnea). The clinical symptoms are measured as following: yes/no/yes worse than usual. Ten minutes after the intervention they will be asked the same questions with yes/no/worse than before the intervention.
Respiratory rate
This will be counted by the health professional attending the patient and is the number of breaths per minute in rest. It is assessed by counting the number of times the patients chest rises in a half minute multiplied by 2.
Oxygen saturation
This is measured using a pulse oximetry device - a non-invasive method to measure arterial oxygen saturation level in percentages
Patient well-being and experience of procedure
Measured using the Borg Categorical rate 10 scale and a single likert-scale question - 'How does the patient experience the procedure' (only measured after the intervention).
Occurrence of side effects
Project assistants will register any side effects such as bleeding from the airways and bronchospasm.
Short term mortality
Death within 7 days from hospital admission
Number of patients readmitted to hospital
30 days readmission after current hospitalization
Patient experience of sputum collection
This outcome will be measured once after an attempt at sputum collection. A five-point Likert scale ranging from "very bad, bad, neither bad nor good, good, very good" will be used to report how the patient experienced the procedure.

Full Information

First Posted
August 31, 2020
Last Updated
August 16, 2021
Sponsor
University of Southern Denmark
search

1. Study Identification

Unique Protocol Identification Number
NCT04595526
Brief Title
Optimal Collection of Specimens of the Lower Respiratory Tract
Official Title
Optimal Collection of Specimens of the Lower Respiratory Tract
Study Type
Interventional

2. Study Status

Record Verification Date
August 2021
Overall Recruitment Status
Completed
Study Start Date
November 9, 2020 (Actual)
Primary Completion Date
July 5, 2021 (Actual)
Study Completion Date
August 5, 2021 (Actual)

3. Sponsor/Collaborators

Responsible Party, by Official Title
Sponsor
Name of the Sponsor
University of Southern Denmark

4. Oversight

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Drug Product
No
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Device Product
No
Data Monitoring Committee
No

5. Study Description

Brief Summary
Respiratory tract infection is a serious condition causing 3 million deaths worldwide every year. Approximately 20-40% of patients with community-acquired pneumonia are hospitalised. Treatment of pneumonia should be initiated as quickly as possible and therefore an early and precise diagnostic is extremely important. Imprecise or delayed diagnosis often results in overconsumption of broad-spectrum antibiotics that contribute to the development of antibiotic resistance. Unspecific symptoms, unsure diagnosis methods and a wait time of up to several days for results challenge a quick and effective diagnosis and treatment of pneumonia. Microbiological analysis of sputum samples is used to identify pathogens causative to pneumonia. However, obtaining specimens of good quality is challenging and affects the sensitivity and specificity of the results. Therefore, the identification of the optimal sputum collecting method is needed to ensure an improved identification process of the pathogen causing pneumonia. The purpose of this study is to determine the most optimal method for obtaining good quality sputum samples when comparing tracheal suction to methods without suction. A more accurate diagnosis will lead to more appropriate antibiotic consumption and will reduce the general development of antibiotic resistance.
Detailed Description
Multi-resistant bacteria (MRB) are associated with high antibiotic consumption and designated by WHO as one of the major threats to the world. In Denmark, the incidence of MRB is generally increasing, and every 20th patient admitted to Danish Emergency Department (ED), is infected with resistant bacteria. Respiratory tract infection is a serious condition, with 3 million death worldwide every year, and about 20-40% of the patients with community-acquired pneumonia need hospitalization. Data from the ED at Hospital Sønderjylland shows that 6% of the patients are registered with a respiratory tract infection, including pneumonia. Treatment of pneumonia should be initiated within a few hours, therefore early and precise diagnostic is extremely important. An imprecise or delayed diagnostic will often result in overconsumption of broad-spectrum antibiotics, contributing to an increase in the development of MRB threatening future treatments possibilities. Currently, pneumonia diagnosis is based on clinical symptoms such as cough, expectoration, chest pain, fever or breathlessness, combined with an x-ray of the lungs, relevant blood tests and microbiological analyses of sputum samples. However, X-ray is an imprecise diagnostic tool, and sputum test responses are first available after 2 days. Thus, the diagnostic is challenged by unspecific symptoms, unsure diagnostic methods and prolonged waiting time for results of up to several days. Sputum can be cultivated to determine the bacterial agent. However, the sputum samples are often of poor quality and many patients cannot deliver a sample. A recently published Danish study shows, that only half of the patients at the ED have sputum samples collected for culturing and none of them had their antibiotic treatment adjusted based on the microbiological results of the sputum. Despite, the use of different microbiological analysis methods to detect bacteria or virus causative of pneumonia, common to the methods is that a representative specimen from the lower respiratory tract is crucial for optimal sensitivity and specificity. Despite technological advances in molecular diagnostics, identifying the etiology of pneumonia remains a challenge. Consequently, identification of optimal sputum collecting method and investigation of an alternative sputum analyses assessment is needed to improve specimens' suitability to identify the etiology of pneumonia. Clinical experience indicates that an inhalation mask with saline solution can induce a successful sputum sampling. Tracheal suction is often used on intubated patients in the intensive care unit to collect sputum, and this method has become the standard procedure at several ED. A comparison of the two methods has not been investigated in an ED context nor has the quality of the collected sputum samples and relevance for clinical practice been explored. Ensuring the optimal sputum collection is of particular relevance during the COVID-19 pandemic. An optimal sputum collection is important to be able to determine if the pneumonia is caused by SARS-CoV-2 or a bacterium - especially in situations where the swab from throat or pharynx presents a negative result, as the method is not sensitive enough to rule out COVID-19 in patients with pneumonia. Accordingly, the Health Board in Denmark recommends tracheal suction of patients admitted with suspected COVID-19 in case of symptoms of the lower respiratory tract, and only in cases the symptoms originates from the upper airways a swab can be performed 1.1 Hypothesis and purpose The hypotheses is that methods without suction (forced expiratory technique and induced sputum) are just as effective as tracheal suction for obtaining a representative specimen from the lower respiratory tract.. The purpose of this study is to determine the most optimal method for obtaining high-quality sputum samples. Following research questions will be explored: What is the difference between the conventional sampling by tracheal suction comparing to sampling using forced expiratory or induced sputum techniques in relation to the suitability of collected specimens from the lower respiratory tract Identification of possible adverse events during sputum collection How do patients experience the two sputum sample collecting procedures? Collection of sputum and adverse events After consent, the patient will be randomized in two groups with 1:1 allocation using permuting blocks. The software tool 'Randomized' offered by Open Patient data Explorative Network (OPEN) will be used. ORGANIZATION The project is anchored in the Research unit of Emergency Medicine, the ED of Hospital Sønderjylland and the Department of Regional Health Research, University of Southern Denmark. The project is a research collaboration between clinicians and researchers in the field of emergency medicine and microbiology at Hospital Sønderjylland (SHS) and Odense University Hospital (OUH).

6. Conditions and Keywords

Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
Respiratory Tract Infections

7. Study Design

Primary Purpose
Diagnostic
Study Phase
Not Applicable
Interventional Study Model
Parallel Assignment
Masking
Outcomes Assessor
Allocation
Randomized
Enrollment
280 (Actual)

8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions

Arm Title
Tracheal suction
Arm Type
Active Comparator
Arm Description
Uses the local standard procedure of tracheal suction to obtain secretions from the lower respiratory tract
Arm Title
Forced expiratory technique and induced sputum
Arm Type
Experimental
Arm Description
This procedure is without suction. The patient's attempts to deliver a sputum sample after forced exhalation and coughing technique. Regardless of the result the patient then receives hypertonic saline by an inhalation mask to induce the sputum. If the patient cannot deliver a sample, tracheal suction will be performed in order to obtain a specimen for the analyses.
Intervention Type
Procedure
Intervention Name(s)
Forced expiratory technique and induced sputum
Intervention Description
The intervention is based on the patient's own attempt to deliver a sputum sample after instructions of proper huff forced exhalation and coughing technique. After an attempt to deliver a sputum sample the patient will receive a 0,9% isotonic saline by an inhalation mask to induce the sputum, thereafter the patient will again make an effort to expectorate a sputum sample repeating the forced expiratory technique.
Intervention Type
Procedure
Intervention Name(s)
Tracheal suction
Intervention Description
Tracheal suction is often used on intubated patients at the intensive care unit to collect sputum, and this method has become the standard procedure at several emergency departments.
Primary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Quality of specimen from the lower respiratory tract
Description
Unsuitable (bad quality) measured by microscopy - > 10 squamous epithelial cells per low power field of view (x10). Suitable (good quality) measured by microscopy - Samples with < 10 squamous epithelial cells per low power field of view
Time Frame
From collection to culture results - up to 5 days
Secondary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Patient clinical symptoms
Description
The patients are asked about 4 specific symptoms (Cough, Expectoration, Chest pain and Dyspnea). The clinical symptoms are measured as following: yes/no/yes worse than usual. Ten minutes after the intervention they will be asked the same questions with yes/no/worse than before the intervention.
Time Frame
Patients are followed before intervention and 10 minutes after intervention
Title
Respiratory rate
Description
This will be counted by the health professional attending the patient and is the number of breaths per minute in rest. It is assessed by counting the number of times the patients chest rises in a half minute multiplied by 2.
Time Frame
Measured twice: Baseline ( at admission) and follow up (10 minutes after intervention)
Title
Oxygen saturation
Description
This is measured using a pulse oximetry device - a non-invasive method to measure arterial oxygen saturation level in percentages
Time Frame
Measured twice: Baseline ( at admission) and follow up (10 minutes after intervention)
Title
Patient well-being and experience of procedure
Description
Measured using the Borg Categorical rate 10 scale and a single likert-scale question - 'How does the patient experience the procedure' (only measured after the intervention).
Time Frame
Measured twice: Baseline ( at admission) and follow up (10 minutes after intervention)
Title
Occurrence of side effects
Description
Project assistants will register any side effects such as bleeding from the airways and bronchospasm.
Time Frame
Registered up to 1 hour after intervention
Title
Short term mortality
Description
Death within 7 days from hospital admission
Time Frame
Registered within 7 days from hospital admission
Title
Number of patients readmitted to hospital
Description
30 days readmission after current hospitalization
Time Frame
Registered within 1 month after readmission
Title
Patient experience of sputum collection
Description
This outcome will be measured once after an attempt at sputum collection. A five-point Likert scale ranging from "very bad, bad, neither bad nor good, good, very good" will be used to report how the patient experienced the procedure.
Time Frame
Measured 5 minutes after procedure

10. Eligibility

Sex
All
Minimum Age & Unit of Time
18 Years
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria: Patients admitted with suspected lower respiratory tract infection Patients > 18 years old One of the following symptoms: dyspnea, cough, expectoration, fever and chest tightness Exclusion Criteria: Patients transferred directly to ICU If the attending physician considers emergency treatment is needed Patients receiving prednisolone treatment of 20mg/day or more over the last 2 weeks Patient which consent cannot be obtained
Overall Study Officials:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Christian Backer Mogensen, MD PhD
Organizational Affiliation
University Hospital of Southern Denmark
Official's Role
Study Chair
Facility Information:
Facility Name
Hospital of Southern Jutland
City
Aabenraa
Country
Denmark

12. IPD Sharing Statement

Plan to Share IPD
No
Citations:
PubMed Identifier
19557211
Citation
Overend TJ, Anderson CM, Brooks D, Cicutto L, Keim M, McAuslan D, Nonoyama M. Updating the evidence-base for suctioning adult patients: a systematic review. Can Respir J. 2009 May-Jun;16(3):e6-17. doi: 10.1155/2009/872921.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
31253624
Citation
Skjot-Arkil H, Mogensen CB, Lassen AT, Johansen IS, Chen M, Petersen P, Andersen KV, Ellermann-Eriksen S, Moller JM, Ludwig M, Fuglsang-Damgaard D, Nielsen FE, Petersen DB, Jensen US, Rosenvinge FS. Carrier prevalence and risk factors for colonisation of multiresistant bacteria in Danish emergency departments: a cross-sectional survey. BMJ Open. 2019 Jun 27;9(6):e029000. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-029000.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
9403422
Citation
Meehan TP, Fine MJ, Krumholz HM, Scinto JD, Galusha DH, Mockalis JT, Weber GF, Petrillo MK, Houck PM, Fine JM. Quality of care, process, and outcomes in elderly patients with pneumonia. JAMA. 1997 Dec 17;278(23):2080-4.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
31333765
Citation
Karakioulaki M, Stolz D. Biomarkers and clinical scoring systems in community-acquired pneumonia. Ann Thorac Med. 2019 Jul-Sep;14(3):165-172. doi: 10.4103/atm.ATM_305_18.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
31183362
Citation
Savvateeva EN, Rubina AY, Gryadunov DA. Biomarkers of Community-Acquired Pneumonia: A Key to Disease Diagnosis and Management. Biomed Res Int. 2019 Apr 30;2019:1701276. doi: 10.1155/2019/1701276. eCollection 2019.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
30949897
Citation
Saukkoriipi A, Palmu AA, Jokinen J. Culture of all sputum samples irrespective of quality adds value to the diagnosis of pneumococcal community-acquired pneumonia in the elderly. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2019 Jul;38(7):1249-1254. doi: 10.1007/s10096-019-03536-9. Epub 2019 Apr 4.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
18376343
Citation
Miyashita N, Shimizu H, Ouchi K, Kawasaki K, Kawai Y, Obase Y, Kobashi Y, Oka M. Assessment of the usefulness of sputum Gram stain and culture for diagnosis of community-acquired pneumonia requiring hospitalization. Med Sci Monit. 2008 Apr;14(4):CR171-6.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
28702281
Citation
Murdoch DR. How best to determine causative pathogens of pneumonia. Pneumonia (Nathan). 2016 Apr 12;8:1. doi: 10.1186/s41479-016-0004-z. eCollection 2016.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
29878856
Citation
Herrero-Cortina B, Alcaraz V, Vilaro J, Torres A, Polverino E. Impact of Hypertonic Saline Solutions on Sputum Expectoration and Their Safety Profile in Patients with Bronchiectasis: A Randomized Crossover Trial. J Aerosol Med Pulm Drug Deliv. 2018 Oct;31(5):281-289. doi: 10.1089/jamp.2017.1443. Epub 2018 Jun 7.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
34600559
Citation
Cartuliares MB, Skjot-Arkil H, Rosenvinge FS, Mogensen CB, Skovsted TA, Pedersen AK. Effectiveness of expiratory technique and induced sputum in obtaining good quality sputum from patients acutely hospitalized with suspected lower respiratory tract infection: a statistical analysis plan for a randomized controlled trial. Trials. 2021 Oct 2;22(1):675. doi: 10.1186/s13063-021-05639-1.
Results Reference
derived

Learn more about this trial

Optimal Collection of Specimens of the Lower Respiratory Tract

We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs