Dataset Information

Forced fluid removal versus usual care in intensive care patients with high-risk acute kidney injury and severe fluid overload (FFAKI): study protocol for a randomised controlled pilot trial.

ABSTRACT: Intravenous administration of fluids is an essential part of critical care. While some fluid administration is likely beneficial, there is increasing observational evidence that the development of fluid overload is associated with increased mortality. There are no randomised trials to confirm this association in patients with acute kidney injury. We aim to perform a pilot trial to test the feasibility of forced fluid removal compared to standard care in patients with acute kidney injury and severe fluid overload, the FFAKI trial.Then FFAKI trial is a pilot, multicentre, randomised clinical trial recruiting adult intensive care patients with acute kidney injury and fluid overload, defined as more than 10% of ideal bodyweight. Patients are randomised with concealed allocation to either standard care or forced fluid removal with a therapeutic target of negative net fluid balance ?1 mL/kg/h. The safety of fluid removal is continually evaluated according to predefined criteria of hypoperfusion: lactate ?4 mmol/L, mean arterial pressure <50 mmHg or mottling beyond the edge of the kneecaps. If patients fulfil one of these criteria, fluid removal is suspended until hypoperfusion has resolved. The primary outcome measure is fluid balance at 5 days after randomisation and secondary outcomes include mean daily fluid balance, fluid balance at discharge from the intensive care unit, time to neutral fluid balance, number of serious adverse reactions and number of protocol violations. All patients are followed for 90 days.The FFAKI trial started in October 2015 and, when completed, will provide data to evaluate whether a large trial of forced fluid removal in critically ill patients is feasible. Our primary outcome will show if the experimental intervention leads to a clinically relevant difference in fluid balance, which could prove beneficial in intensive care patients with acute kidney injury.EudraCT, identifier: 2015-001701-13. Registered on 19 September 2015; ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT02458157 . Registered on 21 May 2015; Danish Ethics Committee, identifier: H-15009589H. Registered on 22 September 2015; Danish Health and Medicines Authority, identifier: 2015070013. Registered on 11 August 2015.

SUBMITTER: Berthelsen RE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5402636 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Forced fluid removal versus usual care in intensive care patients with high-risk acute kidney injury and severe fluid overload (FFAKI): study protocol for a randomised controlled pilot trial.

Berthelsen Rasmus E RE Itenov Theis T Perner Anders A Jensen Jens-Ulrik JU Ibsen Michael M Jensen Andreas Emil Kryger AEK Bestle Morten M

Trials 20170424 1

<h4>Background</h4>Intravenous administration of fluids is an essential part of critical care. While some fluid administration is likely beneficial, there is increasing observational evidence that the development of fluid overload is associated with increased mortality. There are no randomised trials to confirm this association in patients with acute kidney injury. We aim to perform a pilot trial to test the feasibility of forced fluid removal compared to standard care in patients with acute kid ...[more]

PMID: 28438182

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionFluid overload in patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) is associated with higher mortality. There are few randomized controlled trials to guide physicians in treating patients with fluid overload in the ICU, and no guidelines exist. We aimed to elucidate how ICU physicians from Nordic countries define, assess, and treat fluid overload in the ICU.Materials and methodsWe developed an online questionnaire with 18 questions. The questions were pre-tested and revised by specialists in intensive care medicine. Through a network of national coordinators. The survey was distributed to a wide range of Nordic ICU physicians. The distribution started on January 5th, 2022 and ended on May 6th, 2022.ResultsWe received a total of 1,066 responses from Denmark, Norway, Finland, Sweden, and Iceland. When assessing fluid status, respondents applied clinical parameters such as clinical examination findings, cumulative fluid balance, body weight, and urine output more frequently than cardiac/lung ultrasound, radiological appearances, and cardiac output monitoring. A large proportion of the respondents agreed that a 5% increase or more in body weight from baseline supported the diagnosis of fluid overload. The preferred de-resuscitation strategy was diuretics (91%), followed by minimization of maintenance (76%) and resuscitation fluids (71%). The majority declared that despite mild hypotension, mild hypernatremia, and ongoing vasopressor, they would not withhold treatment of fluid overload and would continue diuretics. The respondents were divided when it came to treating fluid overload with loop diuretics in patients receiving noradrenaline. Around 1% would not administer noradrenaline and diuretics simultaneously and 35% did not have a fixed upper limit for the dosage. The remaining respondents 63% reported different upper limits of noradrenaline infusion (0.05-0.50 mcg/kg/min) when administering loop diuretics.ConclusionSelf-reported practices among Nordic ICU physicians when assessing, diagnosing, and treating fluid overload reveals variability in the practice. A 5% increase in body weight was considered a minimum to support the diagnosis of fluid overload. Clinical examination findings were preferred for assessing, diagnosing and treating fluid overload, and diuretics were the preferred treatment modality.

Project description:Common foot problems are independent risk factors for falls in older people. There is evidence that podiatry can prevent falls in community-dwelling populations. The feasibility of implementing a podiatry intervention and trial in the care home population is unknown. To inform a potential future definitive trial, we performed a pilot randomised controlled trial to assess: (i) the feasibility of a trial of a podiatry intervention to reduce care home falls, and (ii) the potential direction and magnitude of the effect of the intervention in terms of number of falls in care home residents.Informed by Medical Research Council guidance on developing and evaluating complex interventions, we conducted a single blind, pilot randomised controlled trial in six care homes in the East of Scotland. Participants were randomised to either: (i) a three month podiatry intervention comprising core podiatry care, foot and ankle exercises, orthoses and footwear provision or (ii) usual care. Falls-related outcomes (number of falls, time to first fall) and feasibility-related outcomes (recruitment, retention, adherence, data collection rates) were collected. Secondary outcomes included: generic health status, balance, mobility, falls efficacy, and ankle joint strength.474 care home residents were screened. 43 (9.1%) participants were recruited: 23 to the intervention, 20 to control. Nine (21%) participants were lost to follow-up due to declining health or death. It was feasible to deliver the trial elements in the care home setting. 35% of participants completed the exercise programme. 48% reported using the orthoses 'all or most of the time'. Completion rates of the outcome measures were between 93% and 100%. No adverse events were reported. At the nine month follow-up period, the intervention group per-person fall rate was 0.77 falls vs. 0.83 falls in the control group.A podiatry intervention to reduce falls can be delivered to care home residents within a pilot randomised controlled trial of the intervention. Although not powered to determine effectiveness, these preliminary data provide justification for a larger trial, incorporating a full process evaluation, to determine whether this intervention can significantly reduce falls in this high-risk population.ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02178527 ; Date of registration: 17 June 2014.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Clostridium difficile infections (CDI) are common, costly and potentially life threatening. Most CDI will respond to antibiotic therapy, but 3%-10% of all patients with CDI will progress to a severe, life-threatening course. Complete removal of the large bowel is indicated for severe CDI. However, the 30-day mortality following surgical intervention for severe CDI ranges from 20% to 70%. A less invasive approach using surgical faecal diversion and direct colonic lavage with polyethylene glycol (PEG) and vancomycin has demonstrated a relative mortality reduction of approximately 50%. As an alternative to these operative approaches, we propose to treat patients with bedside intestinal lavage with PEG and vancomycin instillation via nasojejunal tube, in addition to usual antibiotic management. Preliminary data collected by our research group are encouraging. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:We will conduct a 1-year, single-centre, pilot randomised controlled trial to study this new treatment strategy for patients with severe CDI and additional risk factors for fulminant or complicated infection. After informed consent, patients with severe-complicated CDI without immediate indication for surgery will be randomised to either usual antibiotic treatment or usual antibiotic treatment with the addition of 8 L of PEG lavage via nasojejunal tube. This pilot trial will evaluate our eligibility and enrolment rate, protocol compliance and adverse event rates and provide further data to inform a more robust sample size calculation and protocol modifications for a definitive multicentre trial design. Based on historical data, we anticipate enrolling approximately 24 patients during the 1-year pilot study period.As a pilot study, data will be reported in aggregate. Between-group differences will be assessed in a blinded fashion for evidence of harm, and to further refine our sample size calculation. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:This study protocol has been reviewed and approved by our local institutional review board. Results of the pilot trial and subsequent main trial will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:NCT02466698; Pre-results.

Project description:IntroductionPeople with experience of the criminal justice system typically have worse physical and mental health, lower levels of mental well-being and have less healthy lifestyles than the general population. Health trainers have worked with offenders in the community to provide support for lifestyle change, enhance mental well-being and signpost to appropriate services. There has been no rigorous evaluation of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of providing such community support. This study aims to determine the feasibility and acceptability of conducting a randomised trial and delivering a health trainer intervention to people receiving community supervision in the UK.Methods and analysisA multicentre, parallel, two-group randomised controlled trial recruiting 120 participants with 1:1 individual allocation to receive support from a health trainer and usual care or usual care alone, with mixed methods process evaluation. Participants receive community supervision from an offender manager in either a Community Rehabilitation Company or the National Probation Service. If they have served a custodial sentence, then they have to have been released for at least 2 months. The supervision period must have at least 7 months left at recruitment. Participants are interested in receiving support to change diet, physical activity, alcohol use and smoking and/or improve mental well-being. The primary outcome is mental well-being with secondary outcomes related to smoking, physical activity, alcohol consumption and diet. The primary outcome will inform sample size calculations for a definitive trial.Ethics and disseminationThe study has been approved by the Health and Care Research Wales Ethics Committee (REC reference 16/WA/0171). Dissemination will include publication of the intervention development process and findings for the stated outcomes, parallel process evaluation and economic evaluation in peer-reviewed journals. Results will also be disseminated to stakeholders and trial participants.Trial registration numbersISRCTN80475744; Pre-results.

Dataset Information

Forced fluid removal versus usual care in intensive care patients with high-risk acute kidney injury and severe fluid overload (FFAKI): study protocol for a randomised controlled pilot trial.

Publications

Forced fluid removal versus usual care in intensive care patients with high-risk acute kidney injury and severe fluid overload (FFAKI): study protocol for a randomised controlled pilot trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets