Dataset Information

Incidence of unanticipated difficult airway using an objective airway score versus a standard clinical airway assessment: the DIFFICAIR trial - trial protocol for a cluster randomized clinical trial.

ABSTRACT: Pre-operative airway assessment in Denmark is based on a non-specific clinical assessment. Systematic, evidence-based and consistent airway assessment may reduce the incidence of unanticipated difficult airway management. By assessing multiple predictors for difficult airway management, the predictive value of the assessment increases. The Simplified Airway Risk Index (SARI) is a multivariate risk score for predicting difficult intubation.This study aims to compare the use of the SARI with a non-specified clinical airway assessment on predicting difficult intubation. Further, to compare the examination and registration of predictors for difficult mask ventilation with a non-specified clinical airway assessment on prediction of difficult mask ventilation.We cluster-randomized 28 Danish departments of anaesthesia to airway assessment either by the SARI or by usual non-specific assessment. Data from patients' pre-operative airway assessment are registered in the Danish Anaesthesia Database. Objective scores for intubation and mask ventilation grade the severity of airway managements. The accuracy of predicting difficult intubation and mask ventilation is measured for each group. The primary outcome measure is the fraction of unanticipated difficult and easy intubation.The fraction of unanticipated difficult intubation in Denmark is 1.87%. With a stratified randomization, type 1 error risk of 5% and a power of 80%, 30 departments are required to detect or reject a 30% relative risk reduction equalling a number needed to treat of 180. Sample size estimation is adjusted for the study design and based on standards for randomization on cluster-level. With an average cluster size of 2,500 patients, 70,000 patients will be enrolled over a 1-year trial period. The database is programmed so that registration of the SARI and predictors for difficult mask ventilation are mandatory for the intervention group but invisible to controls.It is innovative to use a national clinical database as the basis for a randomized clinical trial. The method can serve as a precedent for implementation of evidence-based recommendations and database registration.The trial will forward understanding of how to predict and reduce unanticipated difficult airways and how to produce evidence-based recommendations for airway assessment and clinical database development.(NCT01718561).

SUBMITTER: Norskov AK

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3842741 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Incidence of unanticipated difficult airway using an objective airway score versus a standard clinical airway assessment: the DIFFICAIR trial - trial protocol for a cluster randomized clinical trial.

Nørskov Anders Kehlet AK Rosenstock Charlotte Valentin CV Wetterslev Jørn J Lundstrøm Lars Hyldborg LH

Trials 20131023

<h4>Background</h4>Pre-operative airway assessment in Denmark is based on a non-specific clinical assessment. Systematic, evidence-based and consistent airway assessment may reduce the incidence of unanticipated difficult airway management. By assessing multiple predictors for difficult airway management, the predictive value of the assessment increases. The Simplified Airway Risk Index (SARI) is a multivariate risk score for predicting difficult intubation.This study aims to compare the use of ...[more]

PMID: 24152537

Similar Datasets

Project description:The goals of asthma care are reductions in risk and impairment, but achieving these goals requires collaborative work between patients and their clinicians. The purpose of this study was to improve inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) adherence and asthma control by cueing therapeutic communication between patients with asthma and their primary care clinicians.We conducted a prospective, cluster-randomized, controlled effectiveness trial to assess the effect of providing visually standardized, interpreted peak flow graphs (CUE intervention) to patients and their clinicians on ICS adherence and asthma control. Asthma control outcomes were analyzed by season to account for seasonal variations in exacerbation frequency.Although mean log-transformed ICS adherence was not significantly different between the two groups, there was a trend toward preserved adherence in the intervention group over time (P = .16). Intervention patients required fewer courses of oral steroids during winter (9% vs 23%, P < .001) and spring (3% and 17%, P < .001) compared with control subjects. Intervention patients also had fewer periods of worsening symptoms (65% vs 89%, P < .001) and fewer urgent care visits (10% vs 23%, P < .001) during winter compared with control subjects. Post hoc analysis showed significant improvement in the intervention group with respect to ICS adherence during winter months (P < .05), the likely explanation for the reduction in prednisone use and symptoms. Day-to-day peak flow variability in the intervention group fell consistently throughout the study from an average of 32% at baseline to 23% at final measurement (P < .001), indicating less airway reactivity over time.Our findings provide evidence of the value of peak flow monitoring for patients with asthma during seasons of greatest vulnerability, the cold/flu season. The peak flow information apparently led to improvements in ICS adherence resulting in less need for prednisone rescue and fewer episodes of worsening symptoms.

Project description:ImportanceAlthough international guidelines recommend use of the Global Registries of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) risk score (GRS) to guide acute coronary syndrome (ACS) treatment decisions, the prospective utility of the GRS in improving care and outcomes is unproven.ObjectiveTo assess the effect of routine GRS implementation on guideline-indicated treatments and clinical outcomes of hospitalized patients with ACS.Design, setting, and participantsProspective cluster (hospital-level) randomized open-label blinded end point (PROBE) clinical trial using a multicenter ACS registry of acute care cardiology services. Fixed sampling of the first 10 patients within calendar month, with either ST-segment elevation or non-ST-segment elevation ACS. The study enrolled patients from June 2014 to March 2018, and data were analyzed between February 2020 and April 2020.InterventionsImplementation of routine risk stratification using the GRS and guideline recommendations.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was a performance score based on receipt of early invasive treatment, discharge prescription of 4 of 5 guideline-recommended pharmacotherapies, and cardiac rehabilitation referral. Clinical outcomes included a composite of all-cause death and/or myocardial infarction (MI) within 1 year.ResultsThis study enrolled 2318 patients from 24 hospitals and was stopped prematurely owing to futility. Of the patients enrolled, median age was 65 years (interquartile range, 56-74 years), 29.5% were women (n = 684), and 62.9% were considered high risk (n = 1433). Provision of all 3 measures among high-risk patients did not differ between the randomized arms (GRS: 424 of 717 [59.9%] vs control: 376 of 681 [55.2%]; odds ratio [OR], 1.04; 95% CI, 0.63-1.71; P = .88). The provision of early invasive treatment was increased compared with the control arm (GRS: 1042 of 1135 [91.8%] vs control: 989 of 1183 [83.6%]; OR, 2.26; 95% CI, 1.30-3.96; P = .004). Prescription of 4 of 5 guideline-recommended pharmacotherapies (GRS: 864 of 1135 [76.7%] vs control: 893 of 1183 [77.5%]; OR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.68-1.38) and cardiac rehabilitation (GRS: 855 of 1135 [75.1%] vs control: 861 of 1183 [72.8%]; OR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.32-1.44) were not different. By 12 months, GRS intervention was not associated with a significant reduction in death or MI compared with the control group (GRS: 96 of 1044 [9.2%] vs control: 146 of 1087 [13.4%]; OR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.38-1.14).Conclusions and relevanceRoutine GRS implementation in cardiology services with high levels of clinical care was associated with an increase in early invasive treatment but not other aspects of care. Low event rates and premature study discontinuation indicates the need for further, larger scale randomized studies.Trial registrationanzctr.org.au Identifier: ACTRN12614000550606.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Incidence of difficult endotracheal intubation ranges between 3 and 10%. Bougies have been recommended as an airway adjunct for difficult intubation, but reported success rates are variable. A new generation flexible tip bougie appears promising but was not investigated so far. We therefore compared the new flexible tip with a standard bougie in simulated normal and difficult airway scenarios, and used by experienced anesthesiologists. METHODS:We conducted a observational, randomized, cross-over simulation study. Following standardized training, experienced anesthesiologists performed endotracheal intubation using a Macintosh blade and one of the bougies in six different airway scenarios in a randomized sequence: normal airway, tongue edema, pharyngeal obstruction, manual cervical inline stabilization, cervical collar stabilization, cervical collar stabilization and pharyngeal obstruction. Overall success rate with a maximum of 3 intubation attempts was the primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints included number of intubation attempts, time to intubation and dental compression. RESULTS:Thirty-two anesthesiologist participated in this study between January 2019 and May 2019. Overall success rate was similar for the flexible tip bougie and the standard bougie. The flexible tip bougie tended to need less intubation attempts in more difficult airway scenarios. Time to intubation was less if using the flexible tip bougie compared to the standard bougie. Reduced severity of dental compression was noted for the flexible tip bougie in difficult airway scenarios except cervical collar stabilization. CONCLUSION:In this simulation study of normal and difficult airways scenarios, overall success rate was similar for the flexible tip and standard bougie. Especially in more difficult airway scenarios, less intubation attempts, and less optimization maneuvers were needed if using the flexible tip bougie. TRIAL REGISTRATION:clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT03733158. 7th November 2018.

Dataset Information

Incidence of unanticipated difficult airway using an objective airway score versus a standard clinical airway assessment: the DIFFICAIR trial - trial protocol for a cluster randomized clinical trial.

Publications

Incidence of unanticipated difficult airway using an objective airway score versus a standard clinical airway assessment: the DIFFICAIR trial - trial protocol for a cluster randomized clinical trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets