Cargando…
Oral versus intravenous antibiotic treatment for bone and joint infections (OVIVA): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial
BACKGROUND: Bone and joint infection in adults arises most commonly as a complication of joint replacement surgery, fracture fixation and diabetic foot infection. The associated morbidity can be devastating to patients and costs the National Health Service an estimated £20,000 to £40,000 per patient...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4687165/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26690812 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-015-1098-y |
_version_ | 1782406576345186304 |
---|---|
author | Li, Ho Kwong Scarborough, Matthew Zambellas, Rhea Cooper, Cushla Rombach, Ines Walker, A. Sarah Lipsky, Benjamin A. Briggs, Andrew Seaton, Andrew Atkins, Bridget Woodhouse, Andrew Berendt, Anthony Byren, Ivor Angus, Brian Pandit, Hemant Stubbs, David McNally, Martin Thwaites, Guy Bejon, Philip |
author_facet | Li, Ho Kwong Scarborough, Matthew Zambellas, Rhea Cooper, Cushla Rombach, Ines Walker, A. Sarah Lipsky, Benjamin A. Briggs, Andrew Seaton, Andrew Atkins, Bridget Woodhouse, Andrew Berendt, Anthony Byren, Ivor Angus, Brian Pandit, Hemant Stubbs, David McNally, Martin Thwaites, Guy Bejon, Philip |
author_sort | Li, Ho Kwong |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Bone and joint infection in adults arises most commonly as a complication of joint replacement surgery, fracture fixation and diabetic foot infection. The associated morbidity can be devastating to patients and costs the National Health Service an estimated £20,000 to £40,000 per patient. Current standard of care in most UK centres includes a prolonged course (4–6 weeks) of intravenous antibiotics supported, if available, by an outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy service. Intravenous therapy carries with it substantial risks and inconvenience to patients, and the antibiotic-related costs are approximately ten times that of oral therapy. Despite this, there is no evidence to suggest that oral therapy results in inferior outcomes. We hypothesise that, by selecting oral agents with high bioavailability, good tissue penetration and activity against the known or likely pathogens, key outcomes in patients managed primarily with oral therapy are non-inferior to those in patients treated by intravenous therapy. METHODS: The OVIVA trial is a parallel group, randomised (1:1), un-blinded, non-inferiority trial conducted in thirty hospitals across the UK. Eligible participants are adults (>18 years) with a clinical syndrome consistent with a bone, joint or metalware-associated infection who have received ≤7 days of intravenous antibiotic therapy from the date of definitive surgery (or the start of planned curative therapy in patients treated without surgical intervention). Participants are randomised to receive either oral or intravenous antibiotics, selected by a specialist infection physician, for the first 6 weeks of therapy. The primary outcome measure is definite treatment failure within one year of randomisation, as assessed by a blinded endpoint committee, according to pre-defined microbiological, histological and clinical criteria. Enrolling 1,050 subjects will provide 90 % power to demonstrate non-inferiority, defined as less than 7.5 % absolute increase in treatment failure rate in patients randomised to oral therapy as compared to intravenous therapy (one-sided alpha of 0.05). DISCUSSION: If our results demonstrate non-inferiority of orally administered antibiotic therapy, this trial is likely to facilitate a dramatically improved patient experience and alleviate a substantial financial burden on healthcare services. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN91566927 - 14/02/2013 ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-015-1098-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4687165 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2015 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-46871652015-12-23 Oral versus intravenous antibiotic treatment for bone and joint infections (OVIVA): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial Li, Ho Kwong Scarborough, Matthew Zambellas, Rhea Cooper, Cushla Rombach, Ines Walker, A. Sarah Lipsky, Benjamin A. Briggs, Andrew Seaton, Andrew Atkins, Bridget Woodhouse, Andrew Berendt, Anthony Byren, Ivor Angus, Brian Pandit, Hemant Stubbs, David McNally, Martin Thwaites, Guy Bejon, Philip Trials Study Protocol BACKGROUND: Bone and joint infection in adults arises most commonly as a complication of joint replacement surgery, fracture fixation and diabetic foot infection. The associated morbidity can be devastating to patients and costs the National Health Service an estimated £20,000 to £40,000 per patient. Current standard of care in most UK centres includes a prolonged course (4–6 weeks) of intravenous antibiotics supported, if available, by an outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy service. Intravenous therapy carries with it substantial risks and inconvenience to patients, and the antibiotic-related costs are approximately ten times that of oral therapy. Despite this, there is no evidence to suggest that oral therapy results in inferior outcomes. We hypothesise that, by selecting oral agents with high bioavailability, good tissue penetration and activity against the known or likely pathogens, key outcomes in patients managed primarily with oral therapy are non-inferior to those in patients treated by intravenous therapy. METHODS: The OVIVA trial is a parallel group, randomised (1:1), un-blinded, non-inferiority trial conducted in thirty hospitals across the UK. Eligible participants are adults (>18 years) with a clinical syndrome consistent with a bone, joint or metalware-associated infection who have received ≤7 days of intravenous antibiotic therapy from the date of definitive surgery (or the start of planned curative therapy in patients treated without surgical intervention). Participants are randomised to receive either oral or intravenous antibiotics, selected by a specialist infection physician, for the first 6 weeks of therapy. The primary outcome measure is definite treatment failure within one year of randomisation, as assessed by a blinded endpoint committee, according to pre-defined microbiological, histological and clinical criteria. Enrolling 1,050 subjects will provide 90 % power to demonstrate non-inferiority, defined as less than 7.5 % absolute increase in treatment failure rate in patients randomised to oral therapy as compared to intravenous therapy (one-sided alpha of 0.05). DISCUSSION: If our results demonstrate non-inferiority of orally administered antibiotic therapy, this trial is likely to facilitate a dramatically improved patient experience and alleviate a substantial financial burden on healthcare services. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN91566927 - 14/02/2013 ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-015-1098-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2015-12-21 /pmc/articles/PMC4687165/ /pubmed/26690812 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-015-1098-y Text en © Li et al. 2015 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Study Protocol Li, Ho Kwong Scarborough, Matthew Zambellas, Rhea Cooper, Cushla Rombach, Ines Walker, A. Sarah Lipsky, Benjamin A. Briggs, Andrew Seaton, Andrew Atkins, Bridget Woodhouse, Andrew Berendt, Anthony Byren, Ivor Angus, Brian Pandit, Hemant Stubbs, David McNally, Martin Thwaites, Guy Bejon, Philip Oral versus intravenous antibiotic treatment for bone and joint infections (OVIVA): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial |
title | Oral versus intravenous antibiotic treatment for bone and joint infections (OVIVA): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial |
title_full | Oral versus intravenous antibiotic treatment for bone and joint infections (OVIVA): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial |
title_fullStr | Oral versus intravenous antibiotic treatment for bone and joint infections (OVIVA): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial |
title_full_unstemmed | Oral versus intravenous antibiotic treatment for bone and joint infections (OVIVA): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial |
title_short | Oral versus intravenous antibiotic treatment for bone and joint infections (OVIVA): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial |
title_sort | oral versus intravenous antibiotic treatment for bone and joint infections (oviva): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial |
topic | Study Protocol |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4687165/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26690812 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-015-1098-y |
work_keys_str_mv | AT lihokwong oralversusintravenousantibiotictreatmentforboneandjointinfectionsovivastudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT scarboroughmatthew oralversusintravenousantibiotictreatmentforboneandjointinfectionsovivastudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT zambellasrhea oralversusintravenousantibiotictreatmentforboneandjointinfectionsovivastudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT coopercushla oralversusintravenousantibiotictreatmentforboneandjointinfectionsovivastudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT rombachines oralversusintravenousantibiotictreatmentforboneandjointinfectionsovivastudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT walkerasarah oralversusintravenousantibiotictreatmentforboneandjointinfectionsovivastudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT lipskybenjamina oralversusintravenousantibiotictreatmentforboneandjointinfectionsovivastudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT briggsandrew oralversusintravenousantibiotictreatmentforboneandjointinfectionsovivastudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT seatonandrew oralversusintravenousantibiotictreatmentforboneandjointinfectionsovivastudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT atkinsbridget oralversusintravenousantibiotictreatmentforboneandjointinfectionsovivastudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT woodhouseandrew oralversusintravenousantibiotictreatmentforboneandjointinfectionsovivastudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT berendtanthony oralversusintravenousantibiotictreatmentforboneandjointinfectionsovivastudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT byrenivor oralversusintravenousantibiotictreatmentforboneandjointinfectionsovivastudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT angusbrian oralversusintravenousantibiotictreatmentforboneandjointinfectionsovivastudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT pandithemant oralversusintravenousantibiotictreatmentforboneandjointinfectionsovivastudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT stubbsdavid oralversusintravenousantibiotictreatmentforboneandjointinfectionsovivastudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT mcnallymartin oralversusintravenousantibiotictreatmentforboneandjointinfectionsovivastudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT thwaitesguy oralversusintravenousantibiotictreatmentforboneandjointinfectionsovivastudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT bejonphilip oralversusintravenousantibiotictreatmentforboneandjointinfectionsovivastudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial |