Skip to content

AI in PRImary Care Spirometry Pathways for Diagnosis of Lung Disease (APRIL)

Real-world Evaluation of an Artificial-Intelligence Support Software (ArtiQ.Spiro) in Primary Care Spirometry Pathways for the Detection of Lung Disease

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT05865249
Acronym
APRIL
Enrollment
63
Registered
2023-05-18
Start date
2023-06-03
Completion date
2024-04-01
Last updated
2024-01-16

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Lung Diseases

Brief summary

To investigate the feasibility of performing a future real-world randomised controlled trial to determine the clinical effectiveness of ArtiQ.Spiro in supporting diagnostic performance of primary care staff in the interpretation of spirometry

Detailed description

This is a feasibility study for a larger multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT) assessing the impact of the ArtiQ.Spiro software on diagnostic accuracy, care processes, patient and health economic outcomes. The primary objective of this study is to assess the feasibility of a future randomised controlled trial designed to evaluate the real-world clinical effectiveness of an artificial intelligence enabled software to support the diagnostic interpretation and quality assessment of primary care spirometry. Endpoints of the current study will be focused on feasibility and acceptability outcomes. Secondary objectives of this study are to collect data on potential clinical and health economic endpoints for a future randomised controlled trial designed to evaluate the real-world clinical effectiveness of an artificial intelligence enabled software to support the diagnostic interpretation and quality assessment of primary care spirometry. This will help determine the primary endpoint for a future trial and provide data to support a sample size calculation to ensure that any future trial will have adequate power. This is a mixed methods randomised controlled feasibility trial. In PICO format: Population: Individuals with respiratory symptoms referred clinically for primary care spirometry in Hillingdon, Leicestershire, West Hampshire. Intervention: Local primary care spirometry pathway supported by additional artificial intelligence enabled software (ArtiQ.Spiro) Control: Local primary care spirometry alone. Outcomes: Feasibility outcomes with a particular focus on recruitment and retention, and acceptability of intervention and trial design. Clinical outcomes including referrer diagnostic performance and patient health status. Health economic outcomes including health care usage and economic modelling. All participants will undergo their locally agreed spirometry pathway.

Interventions

OTHERSpirometry decision support software (ArtiQ.Spiro)

ArtiQ.Spiro is a decision support software that combines two sub-components - one focussing on quality assessment (ArtiQ.QC), and one on spirometry interpretation (ArtiQ.PFT). It is intended to be used as an adjunct to spirometry to assist with the grading of spirometry quality and the interpretation of spirometry by providing the probability of six disease / or no disease categories.

Sponsors

National Institute for Health Research, United Kingdom
CollaboratorOTHER_GOV
Royal Brompton & Harefield NHS Foundation Trust
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
SINGLE_GROUP
Primary purpose
OTHER
Masking
SINGLE (Outcomes Assessor)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Adults ≥18 years, irrespective of sex, ethnicity, disability, sexual orientation, marital status, educational level, * Referral by GP or nominated representative for primary care spirometry during study period. * Patients able to provide informed consent.

Exclusion criteria

* Age \<18yrs; Absolute contraindication to spirometry. * Any locally defined exclusion to spirometry.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Identification and recruitment of eligible participantsSix monthsContributing data: Screening & recruitment log and trial consort diagram. Progression criteria: Green (≥80% screened eligible, ≥60% eligible recruited), Amber (60-79% screened eligible, 40 - 59% eligible recruited), Red (\<60% screened eligible, \<40% eligible recruited)
Participant retention at follow-upSix monthsContributing data: Participation data and Trial Consort diagram. Progression criteria: Green (≥75% retained at 3 months, ≥60% retained at 6 months), Amber (60-75% retained at 3 months, 40-59% retained at 6 months), Red (\<60% retained at 3 months, \<40% retained at 6 months).
Fidelity of randomisationSix monthsContributing data: Numbers randomised to control/intervention groups and baseline distribution of characteristics of intervention and control groups. Progression criteria: Green: \<10% difference in sample size, proportion of women, proportion of non-white ethnicity, proportion of \> 65 years between control/intervention for each site. Amber: \<15% difference in above criteria; Red: \>15% difference in above criteria.
Fidelity of intervention deliverySix monthsContributing data: Email Logs, and Primary Care Referrer Questionnaire. Progression Criteria: Green (≥90% primary care referrers of the participants in the intervention group sent ArtiQ.Spiro report, ≥90% primary care referrers of the participants in the intervention group accessed ArtiQ.Spiro report for interpretation). Amber (85-94% primary care referrers of the participants in the intervention group sent ArtiQ.Spiro report, 75-89% primary care referrers of the participants in the intervention group accessed ArtiQ.Spiro report for interpretation). Red (\<85% primary care referrers of the participants in the intervention group sent ArtiQ.Spiro report, \<75% primary care referrers of the participants in the intervention group accessed ArtiQ.Spiro report for interpretation).
Contamination of control groupsSix monthsContributing data: Email Logs. Progression Criteria: Green (≤10% primary care referrers of the participants in the control group receiving ArtiQ.Spiro report). Amber (11-15% primary care referrers of the participants in the control group receiving ArtiQ.Spiro report) Red (\>15% primary care referrers of the participants in the control group receiving ArtiQ.Spiro report)
Acceptability of the intervention to referrers, spirometry practitioners and participantsSix monthsContributing data: Stakeholder focus groups. Progression criteria: Green (Reported as acceptable (or can be with minimal modification). Amber (Reported as acceptable with modification).Red (Intervention not acceptable).
Acceptability of outcome measures and their timingSix monthsContributing data: Stakeholder focus groups, and Clinical Outcome Measure collection. Progression criteria: Green (Reported as acceptable or can be with minimal modification, Missing data of ≤10% for each measure).Amber (Reported as acceptable with modification, 11-25% missing data for each measure). Red: (Intervention not acceptable, \>25% missing data for each measure).
Diagnostic accuracy of ArtiQ.Spiro compared with reference standardSix monthsContributing data: Diagnostic accuracy of ArtiQ.Spiro compared with reference standard. Progression criteria: Green: ≥ 80%, Amber: 65-79%, Red: \<65%.
Data collector blindingSix monthsContributing data: Participation data. Progression criteria: Green (Blinding maintained for ≥85% participants), Amber (Blinding maintained for 84-70%), Red (Blinding maintained for \<70%).

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Spirometry Quality Assessment Performance (vs Reference Standard)Six monthsReferrers will be asked to rate the quality of the spirometry of the participant (Acceptable, usable, unusable/unacceptable) based on spirometry report (with or without ArtiQ.Spiro report). This will the be compared with Reference Standard(panel of specialists)
Focus groupsSix months.Three focus groups will be conducted, comprising trial patient participants, primary care referrers and spirometry practitioners. These will be used to assess feasibility and acceptability of the trial procedures, intervention, trial outcomes.
Primary Care Referrer Quality Assessment ConfidenceSix monthsReferrers will be asked to rate the confidence in their quality assessment on a Likert scale (from 0: Very unsure to 10: Very confident).
Primary Care Referrer Technical/Pattern InterpretationSix monthsReferrer will be asked to provide their Technical/Pattern Interpretation of the spirometry report received (Normal, Obstructive, Restrictive, Mixed), and their confidence in their technical/pattern interpretation.
Primary Care Referrer Technical/Pattern Interpretation ConfidenceSix monthsReferrers will be asked to rate their confidence in their Technical/Pattern Interpretation on a Likert scale (from 0: Very unsure to 10: Very confident).
Primary Care Referrer Diagnostic Performance (versus Reference Standard)Six monthsReferrers will be asked to provide a preferred diagnosis based on spirometry report (with/without ArtiQ.Spiro report) and information from primary care records.
Primary Care Referrer Diagnostic ConfidenceSix monthsReferrers will be asked to rate the confidence in their diagnosis on a continuous visual analogue scale (from 0: Very unsure to 10: Very confident).
Patient health statusSix monthsHealth Status will be measured by the EQ5D5L at baseline, 3 and 6 months post spirometry.
Heath and social care usageSix monthsThis will be measured using a Patient Healthcare Resource Use Questionnaire at baseline, 3 and 6 months post spirometry.
Health economic modellingSix monthsThe health economic analysis will compare health-related costs and benefits of ArtiQ.Spiro supported spirometry with standard spirometry pathways, as observed within the study.

Countries

United Kingdom

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026