Dataset Information

Effect of intermediate care on mortality following emergency abdominal surgery. The InCare trial: study protocol, rationale and feasibility of a randomised multicentre trial.

ABSTRACT: Emergency abdominal surgery carries a 15% to 20% short-term mortality rate. Postoperative medical complications are strongly associated with increased mortality. Recent research suggests that timely recognition and effective management of complications may reduce mortality. The aim of the present trial is to evaluate the effect of postoperative intermediate care following emergency major abdominal surgery in high-risk patients.The InCare trial is a randomised, parallel-group, non-blinded clinical trial with 1:1 allocation. Patients undergoing emergency laparotomy or laparoscopic surgery with a perioperative Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score of 10 or above, who are ready to be transferred to the surgical ward within 24 h of surgery are allocated to either intermediate care for 48 h, or surgical ward care. The primary outcome measure is all-cause 30-day mortality. We aim to enrol 400 patients in seven Danish hospitals. The sample size allows us to detect or refute a 34% relative risk reduction of mortality with 80% power.This trial evaluates the benefits and possible harm of intermediate care. The results may potentially influence the survival of many high-risk surgical patients. As a pioneer trial in the area, it will provide important data on the feasibility of future large-scale randomised clinical trials evaluating different levels of postoperative care.Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01209663.

SUBMITTER: Vester-Andersen M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3575365 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Effect of intermediate care on mortality following emergency abdominal surgery. The InCare trial: study protocol, rationale and feasibility of a randomised multicentre trial.

Vester-Andersen Morten M Waldau Tina T Wetterslev Jørn J Møller Morten Hylander MH Rosenberg Jacob J Jørgensen Lars Nannestad LN Gillesberg Inger I Jakobsen Henrik Loft HL Hansen Egon Godthåb EG Poulsen Lone Musaeus LM Skovdal Jan J Søgaard Ellen Kristine EK Bestle Morten M Vilandt Jesper J Rosenberg Iben I Berthelsen Rasmus Ehrenfried RE Pedersen Jens J Madsen Mogens Rørbæk MR Feurstein Thomas T Busse Malene Just MJ Andersen Johnny D H JD Maschmann Christian C Rasmussen Morten M Jessen Christian C Bugge Lasse L Ørding Helle H Møller Ann Merete AM

Trials 20130202

<h4>Background</h4>Emergency abdominal surgery carries a 15% to 20% short-term mortality rate. Postoperative medical complications are strongly associated with increased mortality. Recent research suggests that timely recognition and effective management of complications may reduce mortality. The aim of the present trial is to evaluate the effect of postoperative intermediate care following emergency major abdominal surgery in high-risk patients.<h4>Methods and design</h4>The InCare trial is a r ...[more]

PMID: 23374977

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPostoperative complications and delayed physical recovery are significant problems following emergency abdominal surgery. Physiotherapy aims to aid recovery and prevent complications in the acute phase after surgery and is commonplace in most first-world hospitals. Despite ubiquitous service provision, no well-designed, adequately powered, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial has investigated the effect of physiotherapy on the incidence of respiratory complications, paralytic ileus, rate of physical recovery, ongoing need for formal sub-acute rehabilitation, hospital length of stay, health-related quality of life, and mortality following emergency abdominal surgery. We hypothesise that an enhanced physiotherapy care package of additional education, breathing exercises, and early rehabilitation prevents postoperative complications and improves physical recovery following emergency abdominal surgery compared to standard care alone.MethodsThe Incidence of Complications following Emergency Abdominal surgery: Get Exercising (ICEAGE) trial is a pragmatic, investigator-initiated, multicentre, patient- and assessor-blinded, parallel-group, active-placebo controlled randomised trial, powered for superiority. ICEAGE will compare standard care physiotherapy to an enhanced physiotherapy care package in 288 participants admitted for emergency abdominal surgery at three Australian hospitals. Participants will be randomised using concealed allocation to receive either standard care physiotherapy (education, single session of coached breathing exercises, and daily early ambulation for 15 min) or an enhanced physiotherapy care package (education, twice daily coached breathing exercises for a minimum 2 days, and 30 min of daily supervised early rehabilitation for minimum five postoperative days). The primary outcome is a respiratory complication within the first 14 postoperative hospital days assessed daily with standardised diagnostic criteria. Secondary outcomes include referral for sub-acute rehabilitation services, discharge destination, paralytic ileus, hospital length of stay and costs, intensive care unit utilisation, 90-day patient-reported complications and health-related quality of life and physical capacity, and mortality at 30 days and at 1 year following surgery.DiscussionThe morbidity, mortality, and fiscal burdens following emergency abdominal surgery are some of the worst within surgery. Physiotherapy may be an effective, low-cost, minimal harm intervention to improve outcomes and reduce hospital utilisation following this surgery type. ICEAGE will test the benefits of this commonly provided intervention within a methodologically robust, multicentre, double-blinded, active-placebo controlled randomised trial.Trial registrationACTRN 12615000318583. Registered 8 April 2015.

Project description:ObjectivesIncisional hernias are common complications of midline abdominal closure. The 'Hughes Repair' combines a standard mass closure with a series of horizontal and two vertical mattress sutures within a single suture. There is evidence to suggest this technique is as effective as mesh repair for the operative management of incisional hernias; however, no trials have compared Hughes repair with standard mass closure for the prevention of incisional hernia formation. This paper aims to test the feasibility of running a randomised controlled trial of a comparison of abdominal wall closure methods following midline incisional surgery for colorectal cancer, in preparation to a definitive randomised controlled trial.Design and settingA feasibility trial (with 1:1 randomisation) conducted perioperatively during colorectal cancer surgery.ParticipantsPatients undergoing midline incisional surgery for resection of colorectal cancer.InterventionsComparison of two suture techniques (Hughes repair or standard mass closure) for the closure of the midline abdominal wound following surgery for colorectal cancer.Primary and secondary outcomesA 30-patient feasibility trial assessed recruitment, randomisation, deliverability and early safety of the surgical techniques used.ResultsA total of 30 patients were randomised from 43 patients recruited and consented, over a 5-month period. 14 and 16 patients were randomised to arms A and B, respectively. There was one superficial surgical site infection (SSI) and two organ space SSIs reported in arm A, and two superficial SSIs and one complete wound dehiscence in arm B. There were no suspected unexpected serious adverse reactions reported in either arm. Independent data monitoring committee found no early safety concerns.ConclusionsThe feasibility trial found no early safety concerns and demonstrated that the trial was acceptable to patients. Progression to the pilot and main phases of the trial has now commenced following approval by the independent data monitoring committee.Trial registration numberISRCTN 25616490.

Project description:The reported incidence of incisional hernia following repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) via midline laparotomy is up to 69%. This prospective, multicenter, double-blind, randomised controlled trial was conducted at eleven hospitals in Germany. Patients aged 18 years or older undergoing elective AAA-repair via midline incision were randomly assigned using a computer-generated randomisation sequence to one of three groups for fascial closure: with long-term absorbable suture (MonoPlus®, group I), long-term absorbable suture and onlay mesh reinforcement (group II) or extra long-term absorbable suture (MonoMax®, group III). The primary endpoint was the incidence of incisional hernia within 24 months of follow-up, analysed by intention to treat. Physicians conducting the postoperative visits and the patients were blinded. Between February 2011 and July 2013, 104 patients (69.8 ± 7.7 years) were randomised, 99 of them received a study intervention. The rate of incisional hernia within 24 months was not significantly reduced with onlay mesh augmentation compared to primary suture (p = 0.290). Furthermore, the rate of incisional hernia did not differ significantly between fascial closure with slow and extra long-term absorbable suture (p = 0.111). Serious adverse events related to study intervention occurred in five patients (5.1%) from treatment groups II and III. Wound healing disorders were more frequently seen after onlay mesh implantation on the day of discharge (p = 0.010) and three (p = 0.009) and six (p = 0.023) months postoperatively. The existing evidence on prophylactic mesh augmentation in patients undergoing AAA-repair via midline laparotomy probably needs critical review. As the implementation of new RCTs is considered difficult due to the increasing number of endovascular AAA treated, registry studies could help to collect and evaluate data in cases of open AAA-repair. Comparisons between prophylactic mesh implantation and the small bite technique are also required. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01353443. Funding Sources: Aesculap AG, Tuttlingen, Germany.

Project description:ObjectivesTo assess the feasibility of conducting a pragmatic, multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT) to test the clinical and cost-effectiveness of an informal caregiver training programme to support the recovery of people following hip fracture surgery.DesignTwo-arm, multicentre, pragmatic, open, feasibility RCT with embedded qualitative study.SettingNational Health Service (NHS) providers in five English hospitals.ParticipantsCommunity-dwelling adults, aged 60 years and over, who undergo hip fracture surgery and their informal caregivers.InterventionUsual care: usual NHS care.Experimentalusual NHS care plus a caregiver-patient dyad training programme (HIP HELPER). This programme comprised three, 1 hour, one-to-one training sessions for a patient and caregiver, delivered by a nurse, physiotherapist or occupational therapist in the hospital setting predischarge. After discharge, patients and caregivers were supported through three telephone coaching sessions.Randomisation and blindingCentral randomisation was computer generated (1:1), stratified by hospital and level of patient cognitive impairment. There was no blinding.Main outcome measuresData collected at baseline and 4 months post randomisation included: screening logs, intervention logs, fidelity checklists, acceptability data and clinical outcomes. Interviews were conducted with a subset of participants and health professionals.Results102 participants were enrolled (51 patients; 51 caregivers). Thirty-nine per cent (515/1311) of patients screened were eligible. Eleven per cent (56/515) of eligible patients consented to be randomised. Forty-eight per cent (12/25) of the intervention group reached compliance to their allocated intervention. There was no evidence of treatment contamination. Qualitative data demonstrated the trial and HIP HELPER programme was acceptable.ConclusionsThe HIP HELPER programme was acceptable to patient-caregiver dyads and health professionals. The COVID-19 pandemic impacting on site's ability to deliver the research. Modifications are necessary to the design for a viable definitive RCT.Trial registration numberISRCTN13270387.

Project description:IntroductionAcute colorectal surgery forms a significant proportion of emergency admissions within the National Health Service. There is limited evidence to suggest minimally invasive surgery may be associated with improved clinical outcomes in this cohort of patients. Consequently, there is a need to assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic surgery in the acute colorectal setting. However,emergency colorectal surgical trials have previously been difficult to conduct due to issues surrounding recruitment and equipoise. The LaCeS (randomised controlled trial of Laparoscopic versus open Colorectal Surgery in the acute setting) feasibility trial will determine the feasibility of conducting a definitive, phase III trial of laparoscopic versus open acute colorectal resection.Methods and analysisThe LaCeS feasibility trial is a prospective, multicentre, single-blinded, parallel group, pragmatic randomised controlled feasibility trial. Patients will be randomised on a 1:1 basis to receive eitherlaparoscopic or open surgery. The trial aims to recruit at least 66 patients from five acute general surgical units across the UK. Patients over the age of 18 with a diagnosis of acute colorectal pathology requiring resection on clinical and radiological/endoscopic investigations, with a National Confidential Enquiry into Patient Outcome and Death classification of urgent will be considered eligible for participation. The primary outcome is recruitment. Secondary outcomes include assessing the safety profile of laparoscopic surgery using intraoperative and postoperative complication rates, conversion rates and patient-safety indicators as surrogate markers. Clinical and patient-reported outcomes will also be reported. The trial will contain an embedded qualitative study to assess clinician and patient acceptability of trial processes.Ethics and disseminationThe LaCeS feasibility trial is approved by the Yorkshire and The Humber, Bradford Leeds Research Ethics Committee (REC reference: 15/ YH/0542). The results from the trial will be presented at national and international colorectal conferences and will be submitted for publication to peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration numberISRCTN15681041; Pre-results.

Project description:BackgroundThe role of positive end-expiratory pressure in mechanical ventilation during general anaesthesia for surgery remains uncertain. Levels of pressure higher than 0 cm H2O might protect against postoperative pulmonary complications but could also cause intraoperative circulatory depression and lung injury from overdistension. We tested the hypothesis that a high level of positive end-expiratory pressure with recruitment manoeuvres protects against postoperative pulmonary complications in patients at risk of complications who are receiving mechanical ventilation with low tidal volumes during general anaesthesia for open abdominal surgery.MethodsIn this randomised controlled trial at 30 centres in Europe and North and South America, we recruited 900 patients at risk for postoperative pulmonary complications who were planned for open abdominal surgery under general anaesthesia and ventilation at tidal volumes of 8 mL/kg. We randomly allocated patients to either a high level of positive end-expiratory pressure (12 cm H2O) with recruitment manoeuvres (higher PEEP group) or a low level of pressure (≤2 cm H2O) without recruitment manoeuvres (lower PEEP group). We used a centralised computer-generated randomisation system. Patients and outcome assessors were masked to the intervention. Primary endpoint was a composite of postoperative pulmonary complications by postoperative day 5. Analysis was by intention-to-treat. The study is registered at Controlled-Trials.com, number ISRCTN70332574.FindingsFrom February, 2011, to January, 2013, 447 patients were randomly allocated to the higher PEEP group and 453 to the lower PEEP group. Six patients were excluded from the analysis, four because they withdrew consent and two for violation of inclusion criteria. Median levels of positive end-expiratory pressure were 12 cm H2O (IQR 12-12) in the higher PEEP group and 2 cm H2O (0-2) in the lower PEEP group. Postoperative pulmonary complications were reported in 174 (40%) of 445 patients in the higher PEEP group versus 172 (39%) of 449 patients in the lower PEEP group (relative risk 1·01; 95% CI 0·86-1·20; p=0·86). Compared with patients in the lower PEEP group, those in the higher PEEP group developed intraoperative hypotension and needed more vasoactive drugs.InterpretationA strategy with a high level of positive end-expiratory pressure and recruitment manoeuvres during open abdominal surgery does not protect against postoperative pulmonary complications. An intraoperative protective ventilation strategy should include a low tidal volume and low positive end-expiratory pressure, without recruitment manoeuvres.FundingAcademic Medical Center (Amsterdam, Netherlands), European Society of Anaesthesiology.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To assess the efficacy of a single preoperative physiotherapy session to reduce postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) after upper abdominal surgery. DESIGN:Prospective, pragmatic, multicentre, patient and assessor blinded, parallel group, randomised placebo controlled superiority trial. SETTING:Multidisciplinary preadmission clinics at three tertiary public hospitals in Australia and New Zealand. PARTICIPANTS:441 adults aged 18 years or older who were within six weeks of elective major open upper abdominal surgery were randomly assigned through concealed allocation to receive either an information booklet (n=219; control) or preoperative physiotherapy (n=222; intervention) and followed for 12 months. 432 completed the trial. INTERVENTIONS:Preoperatively, participants received an information booklet (control) or an additional 30 minute physiotherapy education and breathing exercise training session (intervention). Education focused on PPCs and their prevention through early ambulation and self directed breathing exercises to be initiated immediately on regaining consciousness after surgery. Postoperatively, all participants received standardised early ambulation, and no additional respiratory physiotherapy was provided. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:The primary outcome was a PPC within 14 postoperative hospital days assessed daily using the Melbourne group score. Secondary outcomes were hospital acquired pneumonia, length of hospital stay, utilisation of intensive care unit services, and hospital costs. Patient reported health related quality of life, physical function, and post-discharge complications were measured at six weeks, and all cause mortality was measured to 12 months. RESULTS:The incidence of PPCs within 14 postoperative hospital days, including hospital acquired pneumonia, was halved (adjusted hazard ratio 0.48, 95% confidence interval 0.30 to 0.75, P=0.001) in the intervention group compared with the control group, with an absolute risk reduction of 15% (95% confidence interval 7% to 22%) and a number needed to treat of 7 (95% confidence interval 5 to 14). No significant differences in other secondary outcomes were detected. CONCLUSION:In a general population of patients listed for elective upper abdominal surgery, a 30 minute preoperative physiotherapy session provided within existing hospital multidisciplinary preadmission clinics halves the incidence of PPCs and specifically hospital acquired pneumonia. Further research is required to investigate benefits to mortality and length of stay. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ANZCTR 12613000664741.

Dataset Information

Effect of intermediate care on mortality following emergency abdominal surgery. The InCare trial: study protocol, rationale and feasibility of a randomised multicentre trial.

Publications

Effect of intermediate care on mortality following emergency abdominal surgery. The InCare trial: study protocol, rationale and feasibility of a randomised multicentre trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets