Dataset Information

Regional versus General Anesthesia for Promoting Independence after Hip Fracture (REGAIN): protocol for a pragmatic, international multicentre trial.

ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION:Hip fractures occur 1.6 million times each year worldwide, with substantial associated mortality and losses of independence. At present, anaesthesia care for hip fracture surgery varies widely within and between countries, with general anaesthesia and spinal anaesthesia representing the 2 most common approaches. Limited randomised evidence exists regarding potential short-term or long-term differences in outcomes between patients receiving spinal or general anaesthesia for hip fracture surgery. METHODS:The REGAIN trial (Regional vs General Anesthesia for Promoting Independence after Hip Fracture) is an international, multicentre, pragmatic randomised controlled trial. 1600 previously ambulatory patients aged 50 and older will be randomly allocated to receive either general or spinal anaesthesia for hip fracture surgery. The primary outcome is a composite of death or new inability to walk 10 feet or across a room at 60?days after randomisation, which will be assessed via telephone interview by staff who are blinded to treatment assignment. Secondary outcomes will be assessed by in-person assessment and medical record review for in-hospital end points (delirium; major inpatient medical complications and mortality; acute postoperative pain; patient satisfaction; length of stay) and by telephone interview for 60-day, 180-day and 365-day end points (mortality; disability-free survival; chronic pain; return to the prefracture residence; need for new assistive devices for ambulation; cognitive impairment). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:The REGAIN trial has been approved by the ethics boards of all participating sites. Recruitment began in February 2016 and will continue until the end of 2019. Dissemination plans include presentations at scientific conferences, scientific publications, stakeholder engagement efforts and presentation to the public via lay media outlets. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:NCT02507505, Pre-results.

SUBMITTER: Neuman MD

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5129073 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Regional versus General Anesthesia for Promoting Independence after Hip Fracture (REGAIN): protocol for a pragmatic, international multicentre trial.

Neuman Mark D MD Ellenberg Susan S SS Sieber Frederick E FE Magaziner Jay S JS Feng Rui R Carson Jeffrey L JL

BMJ open 20161115 11

<h4>Introduction</h4>Hip fractures occur 1.6 million times each year worldwide, with substantial associated mortality and losses of independence. At present, anaesthesia care for hip fracture surgery varies widely within and between countries, with general anaesthesia and spinal anaesthesia representing the 2 most common approaches. Limited randomised evidence exists regarding potential short-term or long-term differences in outcomes between patients receiving spinal or general anaesthesia for h ...[more]

PMID: 27852723

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Reoperation rates are high after surgery for hip fractures. We investigated the effect of a sliding hip screw versus cancellous screws on the risk of reoperation and other key outcomes. METHODS:For this international, multicentre, allocation concealed randomised controlled trial, we enrolled patients aged 50 years or older with a low-energy hip fracture requiring fracture fixation from 81 clinical centres in eight countries. Patients were assigned by minimisation with a centralised computer system to receive a single large-diameter screw with a side-plate (sliding hip screw) or the present standard of care, multiple small-diameter cancellous screws. Surgeons and patients were not blinded but the data analyst, while doing the analyses, remained blinded to treatment groups. The primary outcome was hip reoperation within 24 months after initial surgery to promote fracture healing, relieve pain, treat infection, or improve function. Analyses followed the intention-to-treat principle. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00761813. FINDINGS:Between March 3, 2008, and March 31, 2014, we randomly assigned 1108 patients to receive a sliding hip screw (n=557) or cancellous screws (n=551). Reoperations within 24 months did not differ by type of surgical fixation in those included in the primary analysis: 107 (20%) of 542 patients in the sliding hip screw group versus 117 (22%) of 537 patients in the cancellous screws group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·83, 95% CI 0·63-1·09; p=0·18). Avascular necrosis was more common in the sliding hip screw group than in the cancellous screws group (50 patients [9%] vs 28 patients [5%]; HR 1·91, 1·06-3·44; p=0·0319). However, no significant difference was found between the number of medically related adverse events between groups (p=0·82; appendix); these events included pulmonary embolism (two patients [<1%] vs four [1%] patients; p=0·41) and sepsis (seven [1%] vs six [1%]; p=0·79). INTERPRETATION:In terms of reoperation rates the sliding hip screw shows no advantage, but some groups of patients (smokers and those with displaced or base of neck fractures) might do better with a sliding hip screw than with cancellous screws. FUNDING:National Institutes of Health, Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Stichting NutsOhra, Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development, Physicians' Services Incorporated.

Project description:IMPORTANCE:More than 300,000 hip fractures occur each year in the United States. Recent practice guidelines have advocated greater use of regional anesthesia for hip fracture surgery. OBJECTIVE:To test the association of regional (ie, spinal or epidural) anesthesia vs general anesthesia with 30-day mortality and hospital length of stay after hip fracture. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS:We conducted a matched retrospective cohort study involving patients 50 years or older who were undergoing surgery for hip fracture at general acute care hospitals in New York State between July 1, 2004, and December 31, 2011. Our main analysis was a near-far instrumental variable match that paired patients who lived at different distances from hospitals that specialized in regional or general anesthesia. Supplementary analyses included a within-hospital match that paired patients within the same hospital and an across-hospital match that paired patients at different hospitals. EXPOSURES:Spinal or epidural anesthesia; general anesthesia. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES:Thirty-day mortality and hospital length of stay. Because the distribution of length of stay had long tails, we characterized this outcome using the Huber M estimate with Huber weights, a robust estimator similar to a trimmed mean. RESULTS:Of 56,729 patients, 15,904 (28%) received regional anesthesia and 40,825 (72%) received general anesthesia. Overall, 3032 patients (5.3%) died. The M estimate of the length of stay was 6.2 days (95% CI, 6.2 to 6.2). The near-far matched analysis showed no significant difference in 30-day mortality by anesthesia type among the 21,514 patients included in this match: 583 of 10,757 matched patients (5.4%) who lived near a regional anesthesia-specialized hospital died vs 629 of 10,757 matched patients (5.8%) who lived near a general anesthesia-specialized hospital (instrumental variable estimate of risk difference, -1.1%; 95% CI, -2.8 to 0.5; P?=?.20). Supplementary analyses of within and across hospital patient matches yielded mortality findings to be similar to the main analysis. In the near-far match, regional anesthesia was associated with a 0.6-day shorter length of stay than general anesthesia (95% CI, -0.8 to -0.4, P?<?.001). Supplementary analyses also showed regional anesthesia to be associated with shorter length of stay, although the observed association was smaller in magnitude than in the main analysis. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE:Among adults in acute care hospitals in New York State undergoing hip repair, the use of regional anesthesia compared with general anesthesia was not associated with lower 30-day mortality but was associated with a modestly shorter length of stay. These findings do not support a mortality benefit for regional anesthesia in this setting.

Project description:ImportanceIn adults undergoing hip fracture surgery, regional anesthesia may reduce postoperative delirium, but there is uncertainty about its effectiveness.ObjectiveTo investigate, in older adults undergoing surgical repair for hip fracture, the effects of regional anesthesia on the incidence of postoperative delirium compared with general anesthesia.Design, setting, and participantsA randomized, allocation-concealed, open-label, multicenter clinical trial of 950 patients, aged 65 years and older, with or without preexisting dementia, and a fragility hip fracture requiring surgical repair from 9 university teaching hospitals in Southeastern China. Participants were enrolled between October 2014 and September 2018; 30-day follow-up ended November 2018.InterventionsPatients were randomized to receive either regional anesthesia (spinal, epidural, or both techniques combined with no sedation; n = 476) or general anesthesia (intravenous, inhalational, or combined anesthetic agents; n = 474).Main outcomes and measuresPrimary outcome was incidence of delirium during the first 7 postoperative days. Secondary outcomes analyzed in this article include delirium severity, duration, and subtype; postoperative pain score; length of hospitalization; 30-day all-cause mortality; and complications.ResultsAmong 950 randomized patients (mean age, 76.5 years; 247 [26.8%] male), 941 were evaluable for the primary outcome (6 canceled surgery and 3 withdrew consent). Postoperative delirium occurred in 29 (6.2%) in the regional anesthesia group vs 24 (5.1%) in the general anesthesia group (unadjusted risk difference [RD], 1.1%; 95% CI, -1.7% to 3.8%; P = .48; unadjusted relative risk [RR], 1.2 [95% CI, 0.7 to 2.0]; P = .57]). Mean severity score of delirium was 23.0 vs 24.1, respectively (unadjusted difference, -1.1; 95% CI, -4.6 to 3.1). A single delirium episode occurred in 16 (3.4%) vs 10 (2.1%) (unadjusted RD, 1.1%; 95% CI, -1.7% to 3.9%; RR, 1.6 [95% CI, 0.7 to 3.5]). Hypoactive subtype in 11 (37.9%) vs 5 (20.8%) (RD, 11.5; 95% CI, -11.0% to 35.7%; RR, 2.2 [95% CI, 0.8 to 6.3]). Median worst pain score was 0 (IQR, 0 to 20) vs 0 (IQR, 0 to 10) (difference 0; 95% CI, 0 to 0). Median length of hospitalization was 7 days (IQR, 5 to 10) vs 7 days (IQR, 6 to 10) (difference 0; 95% CI, 0 to 0). Death occurred in 8 (1.7%) vs 4 (0.9%) (unadjusted RD, -0.8%; 95% CI, -2.2% to 0.7%; RR, 2.0 [95% CI, 0.6 to 6.5]). Adverse events were reported in 106 episodes in the regional anesthesia group and 102 in the general anesthesia group; the most frequently reported adverse events were nausea and vomiting (47 [44.3%] vs 34 [33.3%]) and postoperative hypotension (13 [12.3%] vs 10 [9.8%]).Conclusions and relevanceIn patients aged 65 years and older undergoing hip fracture surgery, regional anesthesia without sedation did not significantly reduce the incidence of postoperative delirium compared with general anesthesia.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02213380.

Project description:IntroductionHip fractures are a leading cause of mortality and disability worldwide, and the number of hip fractures is expected to rise to over 6 million per year by 2050. The optimal approach for the surgical management of displaced femoral neck fractures remains unknown. Current evidence suggests the use of arthroplasty; however, there is lack of evidence regarding whether patients with displaced femoral neck fractures experience better outcomes with total hip arthroplasty (THA) or hemiarthroplasty (HA). The HEALTH trial compares outcomes following THA versus HA in patients 50 years of age or older with displaced femoral neck fractures.Methods and analysisHEALTH is a multicentre, randomised controlled trial where 1434 patients, 50 years of age or older, with displaced femoral neck fractures from international sites are randomised to receive either THA or HA. Exclusion criteria include associated major injuries of the lower extremity, hip infection(s) and a history of frank dementia. The primary outcome is unplanned secondary procedures and the secondary outcomes include functional outcomes, patient quality of life, mortality and hip-related complications-both within 2 years of the initial surgery. We are using minimisation to ensure balance between intervention groups for the following factors: age, prefracture living, prefracture functional status, American Society for Anesthesiologists (ASA) Class and centre number. Data analysts and the HEALTH Steering Committee are blinded to the surgical allocation throughout the trial. Outcome analysis will be performed using a χ(2) test (or Fisher's exact test) and Cox proportional hazards modelling estimate. All results will be presented with 95% CIs.Ethics and disseminationThe HEALTH trial has received local and McMaster University Research Ethics Board (REB) approval (REB#: 06-151).ResultsOutcomes from the primary manuscript will be disseminated through publications in academic journals and presentations at relevant orthopaedic conferences. We will communicate trial results to all participating sites. Participating sites will communicate results with patients who have indicated an interest in knowing the results.Trial registration numberThe HEALTH trial is registered with clinicaltrials.gov (NCT00556842).

Project description:IntroductionIdiopathic subglottic stenosis (iSGS) is an unexplained progressive obstruction of the upper airway that occurs almost exclusively in adult, Caucasian women. The disease is characterised by mucosal inflammation and localised fibrosis resulting in life-threatening blockage of the upper airway. Because of high recurrence rates, patients with iSGS will frequently require multiple procedures following their initial diagnosis. Both the disease and its therapies profoundly affect patients' ability to breathe, communicate and swallow. A variety of treatments have been advanced to manage this condition. However, comparative data on effectiveness and side effects of the unique approaches have never been systematically evaluated. This study will create an international, multi-institutional prospective cohort of patients with iSGS. It will compare three surgical approaches to determine how well the most commonly used treatments in iSGS 'work' and what quality of life (QOL) trade-offs are associated with each approach.Methods and analysisA prospective pragmatic trial comparing the 'Standard of Care' for iSGS at multiple international institutions. Patients with a diagnosis of iSGS without clinical or laboratory evidence of vasculitis or a history of endotracheal intubation 2 years prior to symptom onset will be included in the study. Prospective evaluation of disease recurrence requiring operative intervention, validated patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures as well as patient-generated health data (mobile peak flow recordings and daily steps taken) will be longitudinally tracked for 36 months. The primary endpoint is treatment effectiveness defined as time to recurrent operative procedure. Secondary endpoints relate to treatment side effects and include PRO measures in voice, swallowing, breathing and global QOL as well as patient-generated health data.Ethics and disseminationThis protocol was approved by the local IRB Committee of the Vanderbilt University Medical Center in July 2015. The findings of the trial will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals, national and international conference presentations and directly to patient with iSGS via social media-based support groups.Trial registration numberNCT02481817.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Hip fracture surgery is associated with high in-hospital and 30-day mortality rates and serious adverse patient outcomes. Evidence from randomised controlled trials regarding effectiveness of spinal versus general anaesthesia on patient-centred outcomes after hip fracture surgery is sparse. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:The iHOPE study is a pragmatic national, multicentre, randomised controlled, open-label clinical trial with a two-arm parallel group design. In total, 1032 patients with hip fracture (>65 years) will be randomised in an intended 1:1 allocation ratio to receive spinal anaesthesia (n=516) or general anaesthesia (n=516). Outcome assessment will occur in a blinded manner after hospital discharge and inhospital. The primary endpoint will be assessed by telephone interview and comprises the time to the first occurring event of the binary composite outcome of all-cause mortality or new-onset serious cardiac and pulmonary complications within 30 postoperative days. In-hospital secondary endpoints, assessed via in-person interviews and medical record review, include mortality, perioperative adverse events, delirium, satisfaction, walking independently, length of hospital stay and discharge destination. Telephone interviews will be performed for long-term endpoints (all-cause mortality, independence in walking, chronic pain, ability to return home cognitive function and overall health and disability) at postoperative day 30±3, 180±45?and 365±60. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: iHOPE has been approved by the leading Ethics Committee of the Medical Faculty of the RWTH Aachen University on 14 March 2018 (EK 022/18). Approval from all other involved local Ethical Committees was subsequently requested and obtained. Study started in April 2018 with a total recruitment period of 24 months. iHOPE will be disseminated via presentations at national and international scientific meetings or conferences and publication in peer-reviewed international scientific journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:DRKS00013644; Pre-results.

Dataset Information

Regional versus General Anesthesia for Promoting Independence after Hip Fracture (REGAIN): protocol for a pragmatic, international multicentre trial.

Publications

Regional versus General Anesthesia for Promoting Independence after Hip Fracture (REGAIN): protocol for a pragmatic, international multicentre trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets