A rapid intrapartum test for group B Streptococcus to reduce antibiotic usage in mothers with risk factors: the GBS2 cluster RCT

Author:

Daniels Jane1ORCID,Dixon Emily F2ORCID,Gill Alicia2ORCID,Bishop Jon2ORCID,D’Amico Maria3ORCID,Ahmed Khaled2ORCID,Dodds Julie3ORCID,Tryposkiadis Kostas2ORCID,Wilks Mark4ORCID,Millar Michael4ORCID,Husain Shahid4ORCID,Gray Jim5ORCID,Whiley Angela4ORCID,Moore Patrick V2ORCID,Munetsi Ruvimbo L2ORCID,Hemming Karla2ORCID,Roberts Tracy2ORCID,Plumb Jane6ORCID,Deeks Jonathan2ORCID,Khan Khalid S4ORCID,Thangaratinam Shakila7ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Nottingham Clinical Trials Unit, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK

2. Institute of Applied Health Research, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK

3. Centre for Women’s Health, Institute of Population Health Sciences, Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK

4. Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK

5. Birmingham Women’s and Children’s NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK

6. Group B Strep Support, Haywards Heath, UK

7. Institute of Metabolism and System Research, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK

Abstract

Background Mother-to-baby transmission of group B Streptococcus (Streptococcus agalactiae) is the main cause of early-onset infection. Objectives We investigated if intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis directed by a rapid intrapartum test reduces maternal and neonatal antibiotic use, compared with usual care (i.e. risk factor-directed antibiotics), among women with risk factors for vertical group B Streptococcus transmission, and examined the accuracy and cost-effectiveness of the rapid test. Design An unblinded cluster randomised controlled trial with a nested test accuracy study, an economic evaluation and a microbiology substudy. Setting UK maternity units were randomised to either a strategy of rapid test or usual care. Participants Vaginal and rectal swabs were taken from women with risk factors for vertical group B Streptococcus transmission in established term labour. The accuracy of the GeneXpert® Dx IV GBS rapid testing system (Cepheid, Maurens-Scopont, France) was compared with the standard of selective enrichment culture in diagnosing maternal group B Streptococcus colonisation. Main outcome measures Primary outcomes were rates of intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis administered to prevent early-onset group B Streptococcus infection and accuracy estimates of the rapid test. Secondary outcomes were maternal antibiotics for any indication, neonatal antibiotic exposure, maternal antibiotic duration, neonatal group B Streptococcus colonisation, maternal and neonatal antibiotic resistance, neonatal morbidity and mortality, and cost-effectiveness of the strategies. Results Twenty-two maternity units were randomised and 20 were recruited. A total of 722 mothers (749 babies) participated in rapid test units and 906 mothers (951 babies) participated in usual-care units. There were no differences in the rates of intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis for preventing early-onset group B Streptococcus infection in the rapid test units (41%, 297/716) compared with the usual-care units (36%, 328/906) (risk ratio 1.16, 95% confidence interval 0.83 to 1.64). There were no differences between the groups in intrapartum antibiotic administration for any indication (risk ratio 0.99, 95% confidence interval 0.81 to 1.21). Babies born in the rapid test units were 29% less likely to receive antibiotics (risk ratio 0.71, 95% confidence interval 0.54 to 0.95) than those born in usual-care units. The sensitivity and specificity of the rapid test were 86% (95% confidence interval 81% to 91%) and 89% (95% confidence interval 85% to 92%), respectively. In 14% of women (99/710), the rapid test was invalid or the machine failed to provide a result. In the economic analysis, the rapid test was shown to be both less effective and more costly and, therefore, dominated by usual care. Sensitivity analysis indicated potential lower costs for the rapid test strategy when neonatal costs were included. No serious adverse events were reported. Conclusions The Group B Streptococcus 2 (GBS2) trial found no evidence that the rapid test reduces the rates of intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis administered to prevent early-onset group B Streptococcus infection. The rapid test has the potential to reduce neonatal exposure to antibiotics, but economically is dominated by usual care. The accuracy of the test is within acceptable limits. Future work The role of routine testing for prevention of neonatal infection requires evaluation in a randomised controlled trial. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN74746075. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 26, No. 12. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Funder

Health Technology Assessment programme

Publisher

National Institute for Health Research

Subject

Health Policy

Reference85 articles.

1. Rapid intrapartum test for maternal group B streptococcal colonisation and its effect on antibiotic use in labouring women with risk factors for early-onset neonatal infection (GBS2): cluster randomised trial with nested test accuracy study;Daniels;BMC Med,2022

2. Group B streptococcal colonization, molecular characteristics, and epidemiology;Shabayek;Front Microbiol,2018

3. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Antibiotics for the Prevention and Treatment of Early-Onset Neonatal Infection. London: NICE; 2012.

4. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Prevention of Early-Onset Neonatal Group B Streptococcal Disease. London: RCOG; 2017.

5. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Group B Streptococcal Disease, Early-Onset. London: RCOG; 2017.

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3