Bedside breath tests in children with abdominal pain: a prospective pilot feasibility study

Abstract Background There is no definitive method of accurately diagnosing appendicitis before surgery. We evaluated the feasibility of collecting breath samples in children with abdominal pain and gathered preliminary data on the accuracy of breath tests. Methods We conducted a prospective pilot st...
Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Autor*in:	David C. Wong [verfasserIn] Samuel D. Relton [verfasserIn] Victoria Lane [verfasserIn] Mohamed Ismail [verfasserIn] Victoria Goss [verfasserIn] Jane Bytheway [verfasserIn] Robert M. West [verfasserIn] Jim Deuchars [verfasserIn] Jonathan Sutcliffe [verfasserIn]

Format:	E-Artikel
Sprache:	Englisch

Erschienen:	2019

Schlagwörter:	Appendicitis Child Exhalation Volatile organic compounds Breathomics Biomarkers

Übergeordnetes Werk:	In: Pilot and Feasibility Studies - BMC, 2015, 5(2019), 1, Seite 8
Übergeordnetes Werk:	volume:5 ; year:2019 ; number:1 ; pages:8

Links:	Link aufrufen Link aufrufen Link aufrufen Journal toc

DOI / URN:	10.1186/s40814-019-0502-x

Katalog-ID:	DOAJ006114806

Internformat


LEADER	01000caa a22002652 4500
001	DOAJ006114806
003	DE-627
005	20230309195642.0
007	cr uuu---uuuuu
008	230225s2019 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c
024	7		\|a 10.1186/s40814-019-0502-x \|2 doi
035			\|a (DE-627)DOAJ006114806
035			\|a (DE-599)DOAJ78deb07758d44d23ac27af094e41031f
040			\|a DE-627 \|b ger \|c DE-627 \|e rakwb
041			\|a eng
050		0	\|a R5-920
100	0		\|a David C. Wong \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
245	1	0	\|a Bedside breath tests in children with abdominal pain: a prospective pilot feasibility study
264		1	\|c 2019
336			\|a Text \|b txt \|2 rdacontent
337			\|a Computermedien \|b c \|2 rdamedia
338			\|a Online-Ressource \|b cr \|2 rdacarrier
520			\|a Abstract Background There is no definitive method of accurately diagnosing appendicitis before surgery. We evaluated the feasibility of collecting breath samples in children with abdominal pain and gathered preliminary data on the accuracy of breath tests. Methods We conducted a prospective pilot study at a large tertiary referral paediatric hospital in the UK. We recruited 50 participants with suspected appendicitis, aged between 5 and 15 years. Five had primary diagnosis of appendicitis. The primary outcome was the number of breath samples collected. We also measured the number of samples processed within 2 h and had CO2 ≥ 3.5%. Usability was assessed by patient-reported pain pre- and post-sampling and user-reported sampling difficulty. Logistic regression analysis was used to predict appendicitis and evaluated using the area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUROC). Results Samples were collected from all participants. Of the 45 samples, 36 were processed within 2 h. Of the 49 samples, 19 had %CO2 ≥ 3.5%. No difference in patient-reported pain was observed (p = 0.24). Sampling difficulty was associated with patient age (p = 0.004). The logistic regression model had AUROC = 0.86. Conclusions Breath tests are feasible and acceptable to patients presenting with abdominal pain in clinical settings. We demonstrated adequate data collection with no evidence of harm to patients. The AUROC was better than a random classifier; more specific sensors are likely to improve diagnostic performance. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03248102. Registered 14 Aug 2017.
650		4	\|a Appendicitis
650		4	\|a Child
650		4	\|a Exhalation
650		4	\|a Volatile organic compounds
650		4	\|a Breathomics
650		4	\|a Biomarkers
653		0	\|a Medicine (General)
700	0		\|a Samuel D. Relton \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Victoria Lane \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Mohamed Ismail \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Victoria Goss \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Jane Bytheway \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Robert M. West \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Jim Deuchars \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Jonathan Sutcliffe \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
773	0	8	\|i In \|t Pilot and Feasibility Studies \|d BMC, 2015 \|g 5(2019), 1, Seite 8 \|w (DE-627)818042532 \|w (DE-600)2809935-7 \|x 20555784 \|7 nnns
773	1	8	\|g volume:5 \|g year:2019 \|g number:1 \|g pages:8
856	4	0	\|u https://doi.org/10.1186/s40814-019-0502-x \|z kostenfrei
856	4	0	\|u https://doaj.org/article/78deb07758d44d23ac27af094e41031f \|z kostenfrei
856	4	0	\|u http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40814-019-0502-x \|z kostenfrei
856	4	2	\|u https://doaj.org/toc/2055-5784 \|y Journal toc \|z kostenfrei
912			\|a GBV_USEFLAG_A
912			\|a SYSFLAG_A
912			\|a GBV_DOAJ
912			\|a GBV_ILN_11
912			\|a GBV_ILN_20
912			\|a GBV_ILN_22
912			\|a GBV_ILN_23
912			\|a GBV_ILN_24
912			\|a GBV_ILN_31
912			\|a GBV_ILN_39
912			\|a GBV_ILN_40
912			\|a GBV_ILN_60
912			\|a GBV_ILN_62
912			\|a GBV_ILN_63
912			\|a GBV_ILN_65
912			\|a GBV_ILN_69
912			\|a GBV_ILN_73
912			\|a GBV_ILN_74
912			\|a GBV_ILN_95
912			\|a GBV_ILN_105
912			\|a GBV_ILN_110
912			\|a GBV_ILN_151
912			\|a GBV_ILN_161
912			\|a GBV_ILN_170
912			\|a GBV_ILN_206
912			\|a GBV_ILN_213
912			\|a GBV_ILN_230
912			\|a GBV_ILN_285
912			\|a GBV_ILN_293
912			\|a GBV_ILN_602
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2003
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2005
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2009
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2014
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2055
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2111
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4012
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4037
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4112
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4125
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4126
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4249
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4305
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4306
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4307
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4313
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4322
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4323
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4324
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4325
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4338
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4367
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4700
951			\|a AR
952			\|d 5 \|j 2019 \|e 1 \|h 8

Indexfelder

author_variant	d c w dcw s d r sdr v l vl m i mi v g vg j b jb r m w rmw j d jd j s js
matchkey_str	article:20555784:2019----::esdbettssnhlrnihboiapiarsetv
hierarchy_sort_str	2019
callnumber-subject-code	R
publishDate	2019
allfields	10.1186/s40814-019-0502-x doi (DE-627)DOAJ006114806 (DE-599)DOAJ78deb07758d44d23ac27af094e41031f DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng R5-920 David C. Wong verfasserin aut Bedside breath tests in children with abdominal pain: a prospective pilot feasibility study 2019 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Abstract Background There is no definitive method of accurately diagnosing appendicitis before surgery. We evaluated the feasibility of collecting breath samples in children with abdominal pain and gathered preliminary data on the accuracy of breath tests. Methods We conducted a prospective pilot study at a large tertiary referral paediatric hospital in the UK. We recruited 50 participants with suspected appendicitis, aged between 5 and 15 years. Five had primary diagnosis of appendicitis. The primary outcome was the number of breath samples collected. We also measured the number of samples processed within 2 h and had CO2 ≥ 3.5%. Usability was assessed by patient-reported pain pre- and post-sampling and user-reported sampling difficulty. Logistic regression analysis was used to predict appendicitis and evaluated using the area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUROC). Results Samples were collected from all participants. Of the 45 samples, 36 were processed within 2 h. Of the 49 samples, 19 had %CO2 ≥ 3.5%. No difference in patient-reported pain was observed (p = 0.24). Sampling difficulty was associated with patient age (p = 0.004). The logistic regression model had AUROC = 0.86. Conclusions Breath tests are feasible and acceptable to patients presenting with abdominal pain in clinical settings. We demonstrated adequate data collection with no evidence of harm to patients. The AUROC was better than a random classifier; more specific sensors are likely to improve diagnostic performance. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03248102. Registered 14 Aug 2017. Appendicitis Child Exhalation Volatile organic compounds Breathomics Biomarkers Medicine (General) Samuel D. Relton verfasserin aut Victoria Lane verfasserin aut Mohamed Ismail verfasserin aut Victoria Goss verfasserin aut Jane Bytheway verfasserin aut Robert M. West verfasserin aut Jim Deuchars verfasserin aut Jonathan Sutcliffe verfasserin aut In Pilot and Feasibility Studies BMC, 2015 5(2019), 1, Seite 8 (DE-627)818042532 (DE-600)2809935-7 20555784 nnns volume:5 year:2019 number:1 pages:8 https://doi.org/10.1186/s40814-019-0502-x kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/78deb07758d44d23ac27af094e41031f kostenfrei http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40814-019-0502-x kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2055-5784 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 5 2019 1 8
spelling	10.1186/s40814-019-0502-x doi (DE-627)DOAJ006114806 (DE-599)DOAJ78deb07758d44d23ac27af094e41031f DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng R5-920 David C. Wong verfasserin aut Bedside breath tests in children with abdominal pain: a prospective pilot feasibility study 2019 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Abstract Background There is no definitive method of accurately diagnosing appendicitis before surgery. We evaluated the feasibility of collecting breath samples in children with abdominal pain and gathered preliminary data on the accuracy of breath tests. Methods We conducted a prospective pilot study at a large tertiary referral paediatric hospital in the UK. We recruited 50 participants with suspected appendicitis, aged between 5 and 15 years. Five had primary diagnosis of appendicitis. The primary outcome was the number of breath samples collected. We also measured the number of samples processed within 2 h and had CO2 ≥ 3.5%. Usability was assessed by patient-reported pain pre- and post-sampling and user-reported sampling difficulty. Logistic regression analysis was used to predict appendicitis and evaluated using the area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUROC). Results Samples were collected from all participants. Of the 45 samples, 36 were processed within 2 h. Of the 49 samples, 19 had %CO2 ≥ 3.5%. No difference in patient-reported pain was observed (p = 0.24). Sampling difficulty was associated with patient age (p = 0.004). The logistic regression model had AUROC = 0.86. Conclusions Breath tests are feasible and acceptable to patients presenting with abdominal pain in clinical settings. We demonstrated adequate data collection with no evidence of harm to patients. The AUROC was better than a random classifier; more specific sensors are likely to improve diagnostic performance. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03248102. Registered 14 Aug 2017. Appendicitis Child Exhalation Volatile organic compounds Breathomics Biomarkers Medicine (General) Samuel D. Relton verfasserin aut Victoria Lane verfasserin aut Mohamed Ismail verfasserin aut Victoria Goss verfasserin aut Jane Bytheway verfasserin aut Robert M. West verfasserin aut Jim Deuchars verfasserin aut Jonathan Sutcliffe verfasserin aut In Pilot and Feasibility Studies BMC, 2015 5(2019), 1, Seite 8 (DE-627)818042532 (DE-600)2809935-7 20555784 nnns volume:5 year:2019 number:1 pages:8 https://doi.org/10.1186/s40814-019-0502-x kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/78deb07758d44d23ac27af094e41031f kostenfrei http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40814-019-0502-x kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2055-5784 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 5 2019 1 8
allfields_unstemmed	10.1186/s40814-019-0502-x doi (DE-627)DOAJ006114806 (DE-599)DOAJ78deb07758d44d23ac27af094e41031f DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng R5-920 David C. Wong verfasserin aut Bedside breath tests in children with abdominal pain: a prospective pilot feasibility study 2019 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Abstract Background There is no definitive method of accurately diagnosing appendicitis before surgery. We evaluated the feasibility of collecting breath samples in children with abdominal pain and gathered preliminary data on the accuracy of breath tests. Methods We conducted a prospective pilot study at a large tertiary referral paediatric hospital in the UK. We recruited 50 participants with suspected appendicitis, aged between 5 and 15 years. Five had primary diagnosis of appendicitis. The primary outcome was the number of breath samples collected. We also measured the number of samples processed within 2 h and had CO2 ≥ 3.5%. Usability was assessed by patient-reported pain pre- and post-sampling and user-reported sampling difficulty. Logistic regression analysis was used to predict appendicitis and evaluated using the area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUROC). Results Samples were collected from all participants. Of the 45 samples, 36 were processed within 2 h. Of the 49 samples, 19 had %CO2 ≥ 3.5%. No difference in patient-reported pain was observed (p = 0.24). Sampling difficulty was associated with patient age (p = 0.004). The logistic regression model had AUROC = 0.86. Conclusions Breath tests are feasible and acceptable to patients presenting with abdominal pain in clinical settings. We demonstrated adequate data collection with no evidence of harm to patients. The AUROC was better than a random classifier; more specific sensors are likely to improve diagnostic performance. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03248102. Registered 14 Aug 2017. Appendicitis Child Exhalation Volatile organic compounds Breathomics Biomarkers Medicine (General) Samuel D. Relton verfasserin aut Victoria Lane verfasserin aut Mohamed Ismail verfasserin aut Victoria Goss verfasserin aut Jane Bytheway verfasserin aut Robert M. West verfasserin aut Jim Deuchars verfasserin aut Jonathan Sutcliffe verfasserin aut In Pilot and Feasibility Studies BMC, 2015 5(2019), 1, Seite 8 (DE-627)818042532 (DE-600)2809935-7 20555784 nnns volume:5 year:2019 number:1 pages:8 https://doi.org/10.1186/s40814-019-0502-x kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/78deb07758d44d23ac27af094e41031f kostenfrei http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40814-019-0502-x kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2055-5784 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 5 2019 1 8
allfieldsGer	10.1186/s40814-019-0502-x doi (DE-627)DOAJ006114806 (DE-599)DOAJ78deb07758d44d23ac27af094e41031f DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng R5-920 David C. Wong verfasserin aut Bedside breath tests in children with abdominal pain: a prospective pilot feasibility study 2019 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Abstract Background There is no definitive method of accurately diagnosing appendicitis before surgery. We evaluated the feasibility of collecting breath samples in children with abdominal pain and gathered preliminary data on the accuracy of breath tests. Methods We conducted a prospective pilot study at a large tertiary referral paediatric hospital in the UK. We recruited 50 participants with suspected appendicitis, aged between 5 and 15 years. Five had primary diagnosis of appendicitis. The primary outcome was the number of breath samples collected. We also measured the number of samples processed within 2 h and had CO2 ≥ 3.5%. Usability was assessed by patient-reported pain pre- and post-sampling and user-reported sampling difficulty. Logistic regression analysis was used to predict appendicitis and evaluated using the area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUROC). Results Samples were collected from all participants. Of the 45 samples, 36 were processed within 2 h. Of the 49 samples, 19 had %CO2 ≥ 3.5%. No difference in patient-reported pain was observed (p = 0.24). Sampling difficulty was associated with patient age (p = 0.004). The logistic regression model had AUROC = 0.86. Conclusions Breath tests are feasible and acceptable to patients presenting with abdominal pain in clinical settings. We demonstrated adequate data collection with no evidence of harm to patients. The AUROC was better than a random classifier; more specific sensors are likely to improve diagnostic performance. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03248102. Registered 14 Aug 2017. Appendicitis Child Exhalation Volatile organic compounds Breathomics Biomarkers Medicine (General) Samuel D. Relton verfasserin aut Victoria Lane verfasserin aut Mohamed Ismail verfasserin aut Victoria Goss verfasserin aut Jane Bytheway verfasserin aut Robert M. West verfasserin aut Jim Deuchars verfasserin aut Jonathan Sutcliffe verfasserin aut In Pilot and Feasibility Studies BMC, 2015 5(2019), 1, Seite 8 (DE-627)818042532 (DE-600)2809935-7 20555784 nnns volume:5 year:2019 number:1 pages:8 https://doi.org/10.1186/s40814-019-0502-x kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/78deb07758d44d23ac27af094e41031f kostenfrei http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40814-019-0502-x kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2055-5784 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 5 2019 1 8
allfieldsSound	10.1186/s40814-019-0502-x doi (DE-627)DOAJ006114806 (DE-599)DOAJ78deb07758d44d23ac27af094e41031f DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng R5-920 David C. Wong verfasserin aut Bedside breath tests in children with abdominal pain: a prospective pilot feasibility study 2019 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Abstract Background There is no definitive method of accurately diagnosing appendicitis before surgery. We evaluated the feasibility of collecting breath samples in children with abdominal pain and gathered preliminary data on the accuracy of breath tests. Methods We conducted a prospective pilot study at a large tertiary referral paediatric hospital in the UK. We recruited 50 participants with suspected appendicitis, aged between 5 and 15 years. Five had primary diagnosis of appendicitis. The primary outcome was the number of breath samples collected. We also measured the number of samples processed within 2 h and had CO2 ≥ 3.5%. Usability was assessed by patient-reported pain pre- and post-sampling and user-reported sampling difficulty. Logistic regression analysis was used to predict appendicitis and evaluated using the area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUROC). Results Samples were collected from all participants. Of the 45 samples, 36 were processed within 2 h. Of the 49 samples, 19 had %CO2 ≥ 3.5%. No difference in patient-reported pain was observed (p = 0.24). Sampling difficulty was associated with patient age (p = 0.004). The logistic regression model had AUROC = 0.86. Conclusions Breath tests are feasible and acceptable to patients presenting with abdominal pain in clinical settings. We demonstrated adequate data collection with no evidence of harm to patients. The AUROC was better than a random classifier; more specific sensors are likely to improve diagnostic performance. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03248102. Registered 14 Aug 2017. Appendicitis Child Exhalation Volatile organic compounds Breathomics Biomarkers Medicine (General) Samuel D. Relton verfasserin aut Victoria Lane verfasserin aut Mohamed Ismail verfasserin aut Victoria Goss verfasserin aut Jane Bytheway verfasserin aut Robert M. West verfasserin aut Jim Deuchars verfasserin aut Jonathan Sutcliffe verfasserin aut In Pilot and Feasibility Studies BMC, 2015 5(2019), 1, Seite 8 (DE-627)818042532 (DE-600)2809935-7 20555784 nnns volume:5 year:2019 number:1 pages:8 https://doi.org/10.1186/s40814-019-0502-x kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/78deb07758d44d23ac27af094e41031f kostenfrei http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40814-019-0502-x kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2055-5784 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 5 2019 1 8
language	English
source	In Pilot and Feasibility Studies 5(2019), 1, Seite 8 volume:5 year:2019 number:1 pages:8
sourceStr	In Pilot and Feasibility Studies 5(2019), 1, Seite 8 volume:5 year:2019 number:1 pages:8
format_phy_str_mv	Article
institution	findex.gbv.de
topic_facet	Appendicitis Child Exhalation Volatile organic compounds Breathomics Biomarkers Medicine (General)
isfreeaccess_bool	true
container_title	Pilot and Feasibility Studies
authorswithroles_txt_mv	David C. Wong @@aut@@ Samuel D. Relton @@aut@@ Victoria Lane @@aut@@ Mohamed Ismail @@aut@@ Victoria Goss @@aut@@ Jane Bytheway @@aut@@ Robert M. West @@aut@@ Jim Deuchars @@aut@@ Jonathan Sutcliffe @@aut@@
publishDateDaySort_date	2019-01-01T00:00:00Z
hierarchy_top_id	818042532
id	DOAJ006114806
language_de	englisch
fullrecord	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ006114806</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230309195642.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230225s2019 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1186/s40814-019-0502-x</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ006114806</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJ78deb07758d44d23ac27af094e41031f</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">R5-920</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">David C. Wong</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Bedside breath tests in children with abdominal pain: a prospective pilot feasibility study</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2019</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abstract Background There is no definitive method of accurately diagnosing appendicitis before surgery. We evaluated the feasibility of collecting breath samples in children with abdominal pain and gathered preliminary data on the accuracy of breath tests. Methods We conducted a prospective pilot study at a large tertiary referral paediatric hospital in the UK. We recruited 50 participants with suspected appendicitis, aged between 5 and 15 years. Five had primary diagnosis of appendicitis. The primary outcome was the number of breath samples collected. We also measured the number of samples processed within 2 h and had CO2 ≥ 3.5%. Usability was assessed by patient-reported pain pre- and post-sampling and user-reported sampling difficulty. Logistic regression analysis was used to predict appendicitis and evaluated using the area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUROC). Results Samples were collected from all participants. Of the 45 samples, 36 were processed within 2 h. Of the 49 samples, 19 had %CO2 ≥ 3.5%. No difference in patient-reported pain was observed (p = 0.24). Sampling difficulty was associated with patient age (p = 0.004). The logistic regression model had AUROC = 0.86. Conclusions Breath tests are feasible and acceptable to patients presenting with abdominal pain in clinical settings. We demonstrated adequate data collection with no evidence of harm to patients. The AUROC was better than a random classifier; more specific sensors are likely to improve diagnostic performance. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03248102. Registered 14 Aug 2017.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Appendicitis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Child</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Exhalation</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Volatile organic compounds</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Breathomics</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Biomarkers</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Medicine (General)</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Samuel D. Relton</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Victoria Lane</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Mohamed Ismail</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Victoria Goss</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Jane Bytheway</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Robert M. West</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Jim Deuchars</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Jonathan Sutcliffe</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Pilot and Feasibility Studies</subfield><subfield code="d">BMC, 2015</subfield><subfield code="g">5(2019), 1, Seite 8</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)818042532</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2809935-7</subfield><subfield code="x">20555784</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:5</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2019</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:8</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1186/s40814-019-0502-x</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/78deb07758d44d23ac27af094e41031f</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40814-019-0502-x</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/2055-5784</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">5</subfield><subfield code="j">2019</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="h">8</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
callnumber-first	R - Medicine
author	David C. Wong
spellingShingle	David C. Wong misc R5-920 misc Appendicitis misc Child misc Exhalation misc Volatile organic compounds misc Breathomics misc Biomarkers misc Medicine (General) Bedside breath tests in children with abdominal pain: a prospective pilot feasibility study
authorStr	David C. Wong
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv	@@773@@(DE-627)818042532
format	electronic Article
delete_txt_mv	keep
author_role	aut aut aut aut aut aut aut aut aut
collection	DOAJ
remote_str	true
callnumber-label	R5-920
illustrated	Not Illustrated
issn	20555784
topic_title	R5-920 Bedside breath tests in children with abdominal pain: a prospective pilot feasibility study Appendicitis Child Exhalation Volatile organic compounds Breathomics Biomarkers
topic	misc R5-920 misc Appendicitis misc Child misc Exhalation misc Volatile organic compounds misc Breathomics misc Biomarkers misc Medicine (General)
topic_unstemmed	misc R5-920 misc Appendicitis misc Child misc Exhalation misc Volatile organic compounds misc Breathomics misc Biomarkers misc Medicine (General)
topic_browse	misc R5-920 misc Appendicitis misc Child misc Exhalation misc Volatile organic compounds misc Breathomics misc Biomarkers misc Medicine (General)
format_facet	Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource
format_main_str_mv	Text Zeitschrift/Artikel
carriertype_str_mv	cr
hierarchy_parent_title	Pilot and Feasibility Studies
hierarchy_parent_id	818042532
hierarchy_top_title	Pilot and Feasibility Studies
isfreeaccess_txt	true
familylinks_str_mv	(DE-627)818042532 (DE-600)2809935-7
title	Bedside breath tests in children with abdominal pain: a prospective pilot feasibility study
ctrlnum	(DE-627)DOAJ006114806 (DE-599)DOAJ78deb07758d44d23ac27af094e41031f
title_full	Bedside breath tests in children with abdominal pain: a prospective pilot feasibility study
author_sort	David C. Wong
journal	Pilot and Feasibility Studies
journalStr	Pilot and Feasibility Studies
callnumber-first-code	R
lang_code	eng
isOA_bool	true
recordtype	marc
publishDateSort	2019
contenttype_str_mv	txt
container_start_page	8
author_browse	David C. Wong Samuel D. Relton Victoria Lane Mohamed Ismail Victoria Goss Jane Bytheway Robert M. West Jim Deuchars Jonathan Sutcliffe
container_volume	5
class	R5-920
format_se	Elektronische Aufsätze
author-letter	David C. Wong
doi_str_mv	10.1186/s40814-019-0502-x
author2-role	verfasserin
title_sort	bedside breath tests in children with abdominal pain: a prospective pilot feasibility study
callnumber	R5-920
title_auth	Bedside breath tests in children with abdominal pain: a prospective pilot feasibility study
abstract	Abstract Background There is no definitive method of accurately diagnosing appendicitis before surgery. We evaluated the feasibility of collecting breath samples in children with abdominal pain and gathered preliminary data on the accuracy of breath tests. Methods We conducted a prospective pilot study at a large tertiary referral paediatric hospital in the UK. We recruited 50 participants with suspected appendicitis, aged between 5 and 15 years. Five had primary diagnosis of appendicitis. The primary outcome was the number of breath samples collected. We also measured the number of samples processed within 2 h and had CO2 ≥ 3.5%. Usability was assessed by patient-reported pain pre- and post-sampling and user-reported sampling difficulty. Logistic regression analysis was used to predict appendicitis and evaluated using the area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUROC). Results Samples were collected from all participants. Of the 45 samples, 36 were processed within 2 h. Of the 49 samples, 19 had %CO2 ≥ 3.5%. No difference in patient-reported pain was observed (p = 0.24). Sampling difficulty was associated with patient age (p = 0.004). The logistic regression model had AUROC = 0.86. Conclusions Breath tests are feasible and acceptable to patients presenting with abdominal pain in clinical settings. We demonstrated adequate data collection with no evidence of harm to patients. The AUROC was better than a random classifier; more specific sensors are likely to improve diagnostic performance. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03248102. Registered 14 Aug 2017.
abstractGer	Abstract Background There is no definitive method of accurately diagnosing appendicitis before surgery. We evaluated the feasibility of collecting breath samples in children with abdominal pain and gathered preliminary data on the accuracy of breath tests. Methods We conducted a prospective pilot study at a large tertiary referral paediatric hospital in the UK. We recruited 50 participants with suspected appendicitis, aged between 5 and 15 years. Five had primary diagnosis of appendicitis. The primary outcome was the number of breath samples collected. We also measured the number of samples processed within 2 h and had CO2 ≥ 3.5%. Usability was assessed by patient-reported pain pre- and post-sampling and user-reported sampling difficulty. Logistic regression analysis was used to predict appendicitis and evaluated using the area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUROC). Results Samples were collected from all participants. Of the 45 samples, 36 were processed within 2 h. Of the 49 samples, 19 had %CO2 ≥ 3.5%. No difference in patient-reported pain was observed (p = 0.24). Sampling difficulty was associated with patient age (p = 0.004). The logistic regression model had AUROC = 0.86. Conclusions Breath tests are feasible and acceptable to patients presenting with abdominal pain in clinical settings. We demonstrated adequate data collection with no evidence of harm to patients. The AUROC was better than a random classifier; more specific sensors are likely to improve diagnostic performance. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03248102. Registered 14 Aug 2017.
abstract_unstemmed	Abstract Background There is no definitive method of accurately diagnosing appendicitis before surgery. We evaluated the feasibility of collecting breath samples in children with abdominal pain and gathered preliminary data on the accuracy of breath tests. Methods We conducted a prospective pilot study at a large tertiary referral paediatric hospital in the UK. We recruited 50 participants with suspected appendicitis, aged between 5 and 15 years. Five had primary diagnosis of appendicitis. The primary outcome was the number of breath samples collected. We also measured the number of samples processed within 2 h and had CO2 ≥ 3.5%. Usability was assessed by patient-reported pain pre- and post-sampling and user-reported sampling difficulty. Logistic regression analysis was used to predict appendicitis and evaluated using the area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUROC). Results Samples were collected from all participants. Of the 45 samples, 36 were processed within 2 h. Of the 49 samples, 19 had %CO2 ≥ 3.5%. No difference in patient-reported pain was observed (p = 0.24). Sampling difficulty was associated with patient age (p = 0.004). The logistic regression model had AUROC = 0.86. Conclusions Breath tests are feasible and acceptable to patients presenting with abdominal pain in clinical settings. We demonstrated adequate data collection with no evidence of harm to patients. The AUROC was better than a random classifier; more specific sensors are likely to improve diagnostic performance. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03248102. Registered 14 Aug 2017.
collection_details	GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700
container_issue	1
title_short	Bedside breath tests in children with abdominal pain: a prospective pilot feasibility study
url	https://doi.org/10.1186/s40814-019-0502-x https://doaj.org/article/78deb07758d44d23ac27af094e41031f http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40814-019-0502-x https://doaj.org/toc/2055-5784
remote_bool	true
author2	Samuel D. Relton Victoria Lane Mohamed Ismail Victoria Goss Jane Bytheway Robert M. West Jim Deuchars Jonathan Sutcliffe
author2Str	Samuel D. Relton Victoria Lane Mohamed Ismail Victoria Goss Jane Bytheway Robert M. West Jim Deuchars Jonathan Sutcliffe
ppnlink	818042532
callnumber-subject	R - General Medicine
mediatype_str_mv	c
isOA_txt	true
hochschulschrift_bool	false
doi_str	10.1186/s40814-019-0502-x
callnumber-a	R5-920
up_date	2024-07-03T19:03:56.719Z
_version_	1803585780945256448
fullrecord_marcxml	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ006114806</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230309195642.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230225s2019 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1186/s40814-019-0502-x</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ006114806</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJ78deb07758d44d23ac27af094e41031f</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">R5-920</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">David C. Wong</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Bedside breath tests in children with abdominal pain: a prospective pilot feasibility study</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2019</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abstract Background There is no definitive method of accurately diagnosing appendicitis before surgery. We evaluated the feasibility of collecting breath samples in children with abdominal pain and gathered preliminary data on the accuracy of breath tests. Methods We conducted a prospective pilot study at a large tertiary referral paediatric hospital in the UK. We recruited 50 participants with suspected appendicitis, aged between 5 and 15 years. Five had primary diagnosis of appendicitis. The primary outcome was the number of breath samples collected. We also measured the number of samples processed within 2 h and had CO2 ≥ 3.5%. Usability was assessed by patient-reported pain pre- and post-sampling and user-reported sampling difficulty. Logistic regression analysis was used to predict appendicitis and evaluated using the area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUROC). Results Samples were collected from all participants. Of the 45 samples, 36 were processed within 2 h. Of the 49 samples, 19 had %CO2 ≥ 3.5%. No difference in patient-reported pain was observed (p = 0.24). Sampling difficulty was associated with patient age (p = 0.004). The logistic regression model had AUROC = 0.86. Conclusions Breath tests are feasible and acceptable to patients presenting with abdominal pain in clinical settings. We demonstrated adequate data collection with no evidence of harm to patients. The AUROC was better than a random classifier; more specific sensors are likely to improve diagnostic performance. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03248102. Registered 14 Aug 2017.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Appendicitis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Child</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Exhalation</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Volatile organic compounds</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Breathomics</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Biomarkers</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Medicine (General)</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Samuel D. Relton</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Victoria Lane</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Mohamed Ismail</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Victoria Goss</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Jane Bytheway</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Robert M. West</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Jim Deuchars</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Jonathan Sutcliffe</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Pilot and Feasibility Studies</subfield><subfield code="d">BMC, 2015</subfield><subfield code="g">5(2019), 1, Seite 8</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)818042532</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2809935-7</subfield><subfield code="x">20555784</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:5</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2019</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:8</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1186/s40814-019-0502-x</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/78deb07758d44d23ac27af094e41031f</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40814-019-0502-x</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/2055-5784</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">5</subfield><subfield code="j">2019</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="h">8</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
score	7.3995275

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Schreiben Sie uns!

Bedside breath tests in children with abdominal pain: a prospective pilot feasibility study

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Zugang & Verfügbarkeit

Vorhandene Bände

Nicht das Richtige dabei?