PURLs

Is it time to approach spontaneous pneumothorax more conservatively?

Author and Disclosure Information

 

References

WHAT’S NEW

Conservative management enabled most patients to avoid invasive Tx risks

In this specific patient population, conservative management of primary spontaneous pneumothorax was noninferior to interventional management and had a lower risk of serious adverse events. This management practice spared 85% of the patients from invasive intervention. As a result, they experienced a shortened hospital stay, fewer days missed from school or work, less exposure to radiation from repeat chest x-rays, and a lower rate of adverse events. Additionally, fewer of these patients had early pneumothorax recurrence.

CAVEATS

There were limitations in the trial’s original statistical design

This study had a specific follow-up timetable, and some of the participants were not examined until after the 8-week checkpoint or were lost to follow-up entirely. The authors attempted to address these limitations (and show transparency) by providing additional sensitivity analyses as well as providing the intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses for the primary outcome at 8 weeks. Noninferiority was maintained in all analyses except for the sensitivity analysis that treated missing data as treatment failure. Therefore, the authors note these approaches result in “statistical fragility” and are exploratory.

CHALLENGES TO IMPLEMENTATION

Pneumothorax is not commonly seen in outpatient settings

Family physicians working in outpatient settings generally do not encounter pneumothorax and, using current guidelines, would refer for emergency or inpatient care. This study opens the possibility of managing selected patients in an outpatient setting; however, this would require at least a 4-hour period of observation, which may be impractical for many outpatient-based physicians. Additionally, the study uses the Collins method to define moderate-to-large pneumothorax, which is likely an uncommon practice and thus not applicable in most primary care settings.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The PURLs Surveillance System was supported in part by Grant Number UL1RR024999 from the National Center for Research Resources, a Clinical Translational Science Award to the University of Chicago. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Center for Research Resources or the National Institutes of Health.

Pages

Copyright © 2022. The Family Physicians Inquiries Network. All rights reserved.

Online-Only Materials

AttachmentSize
PDF icon jfp07101e9_methodology.pdf395.07 KB

Recommended Reading

Cervical cancer screening rates on the decline in the U.S.
MDedge Family Medicine
Program targets preschoolers to promote heart health
MDedge Family Medicine
ACP advocates outpatient treatment of uncomplicated diverticulitis
MDedge Family Medicine
Breastfeeding linked to lower CVD risk in later life
MDedge Family Medicine
How to identify balance disorders and reduce fall risk
MDedge Family Medicine
A practical guide to appendicitis evaluation and treatment
MDedge Family Medicine
Can extended anticoagulation prophylaxis after discharge prevent thromboembolism?
MDedge Family Medicine
Easing dementia caregiver burden, addressing interpersonal violence
MDedge Family Medicine
Should we stop prescribing IM progesterone to women with a history of preterm labor?
MDedge Family Medicine
No amount of alcohol safe for the heart: WHF
MDedge Family Medicine