Search

Introduction: Acute uncomplicated urinary tract infection (UTI) is a common condition with potentially serious sequelae that is mostly diagnosed and managed in primary care settings. Around half of all women have a UTI in their lifetime, and a quarter experience an infection caused by organisms resistant to more than one antibiotic. Reducing inappropriate prescribing of antibiotics is a core tenet of antimicrobial stewardship. However, current diagnostics for UTI are unfit for purpose in acute (highest prescribing) settings, being too slow to inform the required immediate decision-making and often confounded by sample contamination.Rapid point-of-care diagnostic tests (POCTs) that facilitate timely decision-making are potential solutions to this problem. Several such tests have reached advanced stages of technology readiness, but their diagnostic performance has not been evaluated in primary care with clinical users. To progress novel tests towards implementation, a diagnostic field study is required, to allow for parallel and sequential evaluation of multiple tests in a primary care population., Methods and Analysis: We will recruit participants assigned female at birth from primary care clinics in England who contact their clinic with symptoms of acute uncomplicated UTI. Eligible participants will complete a short questionnaire to capture symptoms and symptom severity and will provide a urine sample. Samples will be split and initially tested using novel index tests (POCTs) and conventional urinalysis 'dipstick' at the primary care clinic. The second part of the sample will be processed at a National Health Service-based reference laboratory using a modified reference standard including microscopy, microbiological culture, pathogen speciation and antimicrobial susceptibility testing. The UTI reference standard culture, although based on the national methods, is modified to provide accurate bacterial counts, better to define a microbiological diagnosis of UTI. Susceptibility testing will be performed using 'gold-standard' methods, not usually performed in diagnostic laboratories. The primary outcome will be the diagnostic performance (sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values) of POCTs for detection of UTI and antimicrobial susceptibility for POCTs that include antimicrobial susceptibility testing. Secondary outcomes will include the symptom profile of patients presenting with uncomplicated UTI, a theoretical determination of how use of POCT results might change prescribing, an understanding of POCT failure rate and qualitative capture of the experiences of those using the POCT to deliver the study in primary care clinics., Ethics and Dissemination: Ethical approval was received from the London Central Research Ethics Committee (23/LO/0371) and the UK Health Research Authority. We will publish the findings of The plaTform fOr Urinary tract infection diagnostiC evAluatioN evaluations in peer-reviewed medical journals and more broadly following a dissemination plan formulated by a communications specialist in consultation with patients and the public., Trial Registration Number: ISRCTN80937472., Competing Interests: Competing interests: It is the intention that technology (POCT), associated consumables and training will be provided free of charge to the study under contractual arrangements that preserve the team’s unrestricted rights to publish results. CCB is a member of the Editorial Advisory Board of BMJ Open., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2025. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ Group.)

Background: Deprescribing of antihypertensive medications is recommended for some older patients with low blood pressure and frailty. The OPTiMISE trial showed that this deprescribing can be achieved with no differences in blood pressure control at 3 months compared with usual care. We aimed to examine effects of deprescribing on longer-term hospitalisation and mortality., Methods: This randomised controlled trial enrolled participants from 69 general practices across central and southern England. Participants aged 80 years or older, with systolic blood pressure less than 150 mm Hg and who were receiving two or more antihypertensive medications, were randomly assigned (1:1) to antihypertensive medication reduction (removal of one antihypertensive) or usual care. General practitioners and participants were aware of the treatment allocation following randomisation but individuals responsible for analysing the data were masked to the treatment allocation throughout the study. Participants were followed up via their primary and secondary care electronic health records at least 3 years after randomisation. The primary outcome was time to all-cause hospitalisation or mortality. Intention-to-treat analyses were done using Cox regression modelling. A per-protocol analysis of the primary outcome was also done, excluding participants from the intervention group who did not reduce treatment or who had medication reinstated during the initial trial 12-week follow-up period. This study is registered with the European Union Drug Regulating Authorities Clinical Trials Database (EudraCT2016-004236-38) and the ISRCTN Registry (ISRCTN97503221)., Findings: Between March 20, 2017, and Sept 30, 2018, a total of 569 participants were randomly assigned. Of these, 564 (99%; intervention=280; control=284) were followed up for a median of 4·0 years (IQR 3·7-4·3). Participants had a mean age of 84·8 years (SD 3·4) at baseline and 273 (48%) were women. Medication reduction was sustained in 109 participants at follow-up (51% of the 213 participants alive in the intervention group). Participants in the intervention group had a larger reduction in antihypertensives than the control group (adjusted mean difference -0·35 drugs [95% CI -0·52 to -0·18]). Overall, 202 (72%) participants in the intervention group and 218 (77%) participants in the control group experienced hospitalisation or mortality during follow-up (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0·93 [95% CI 0·76 to 1·12]). There was some evidence that the proportion of participants experiencing the primary outcome in the per-protocol population was lower in the intervention group (aHR 0·80 [0·64 to 1·00])., Interpretation: Half of participants sustained medication reduction with no evidence of an increase in all-cause hospitalisation or mortality. These findings suggest that an antihypertensive deprescribing intervention might be safe for people aged 80 years or older with controlled blood pressure taking two or more antihypertensives., Funding: British Heart Foundation and National Institute for Health and Care Research., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests JPS reports funding from the Wellcome Trust/Royal Society, National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR), British Heart Foundation, and Stroke Association; payment for consultancy from DoctorLink; is a Data Safety Monitoring Board member for the Hypertension Treatment in Nigeria Study sponsored by Northwestern University; and is Secretary and trustee for the British and Irish Hypertension Society. GAF is Board non-executive Director for the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. FDRH reports honoraria for lectures from Pfizer/BMS, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, and AstraZeneca; and is chair of the European Primary Care Cardiovascular Society and International Primary Care Cardiovascular Society. SdL has received research grants to his university for investigator-led cardiometabolic research from Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, GSK, MSD, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Sanofi, and Seqirus; has been a member of advisory boards for AstraZeneca, GSK, Sanofi, and Seqirus; and has received medical writing support provided by AstraZeneca, GSK, and Pfizer. JM reports funding from an NIHR Senior Investigator Award and honoraria for lectures from Bristol Myers Squibb and Pfizer. RAP reports NIHR funding to his institution for other research related to medicines use and Medical Research Council funding to his institution unrelated to this project. L-MY reports NIHR funding to her institution for other research. RJM reports funding from the NIHR, British Heart Foundation, and Stroke Association; has received royalties, consulting fees (paid to his institution), and research equipment from Omron; has received royalties from Sensyne; and has received honoraria (paid to his institution) for lectures from the Finnish Hypertension Society and Canadian Hypertension Society., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)