ABSTRACT
Background/aims: One-fifth of conveyances to the emergency department (ED) are due to acute-on-chronic breathlessness. Paramedic breathlessness management may ease distress quicker and/or reduce ED conveyances. We evaluated the feasibility of a full trial of a paramedic delivered intervention to reduce avoidable conveyances (recruitment, randomisation, consent, training and intervention acceptability, adherence, data quality, best primary outcome, sample size estimation). The intervention comprised evidence-based non-drug techniques and a self-management booklet. Methods: This mixed-methods feasibility cluster randomised controlled trial (ISRCTN80330546) with embedded qualitative study about trial processes, training and intervention delivery, randomised paramedics to usual care or to intervention + usual care. Retrospective patient consent to use call-out data and prospective patient/carer consent for follow-up was sought. Potential primary outcomes were breathlessness intensity (numerical rating scale) and ED conveyance. Follow-up included an interview for patients/carers and questionnaires at 14 days, 1 and 6 months and paramedic focus groups and survey. Results: Recruitment was during the COVID-19 pandemic, leading to high demands on paramedics and fewer call-outs by eligible patients. We enrolled 29 paramedics;9 withdrew. Randomisation and trial procedures were acceptable. Paramedics recruited 13 patients;8 were followed up. Data quality was good. The intervention did not extend call-out time, was delivered with fidelity and no contamination and was acceptable to patients, carers and paramedics. There were no repeat call-outs < 48 hours. Recruitment stop-go criteria were not met. We had insufficient data for sample size estimation. Conclusions: A full trial in the same circumstances is not feasible. However, valuable information was gained on recruitment, attrition, consent, training and intervention acceptability and adherence, and patient-reported data collection.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Accurate and rapid testing for SARS-COV-2 antibodies could improve the diagnosis and management of COVID-19. In this study, we aim to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of a commercially available point-of-care lateral flow kit independently and in comparison to an established platform-based system. METHOD: Samples from 144 PCR-confirmed COVID-19 cases and 130 pre-pandemic negative controls were tested in parallel by MP Rapid 2019-NCOV IgM/IgG Combo test and Roche Elecsys. Comparison of results based on serum and capillary blood testing was undertaken. RESULTS: Sensitivity at day 15 onwards was 100% for both methods. Between days 1 and 7 post admission, the IgM/IgG Combo test and Roche Elecsys shown sensitivity of 74% (95%CI: 62%-85%) vs. 67% (95% CI: 55%-79%, P = 0.3947). Combo test specificities were 100% for IgG, 98.5% for IgM vs. Roche Elecsys specificity of 100%. Concordance analysis showed 98.5% agreement to the Roche Elecsys method (Cohen's Kappa 0.96 95% CI [0.92-0.99]). Capillary blood results showed complete agreement with serum samples using the Combo test. CONCLUSION: In comparison to Roche Elecsys, our data show that the MP Rapid 2019-NCOV IgM/IgG Combo test provides a high-confidence assay system for the detection of previous exposure to SARS-COV-2 infection with advantage of affording near-patient testing.