Dataset Information

FLUID trial: a protocol for a hospital-wide open-label cluster crossover pragmatic comparative effectiveness randomised pilot trial.

ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION:0.9% saline and Ringer's lactate are the two most common resuscitation crystalloid fluids. 0.9% saline may lead to hyperchloraemic metabolic acidosis and may be associated with impaired kidney function and death. Few large multicentre randomised trials have been conducted to evaluate the effect of these two fluids on clinically important outcomes. METHODS:FLUID is a pragmatic pilot cluster randomised crossover trial in which four hospitals will be randomised to normal saline or Ringer's lactate for 14 weeks, then crossover to the alternative fluid for the subsequent 14 weeks after 1 to 3?week transition. With waiver of informed consent, all adult and paediatric patients admitted to participating sites will be included in the FLUID trial except for neonates. Primary feasibility outcome is study fluid protocol adherence (target:?80%). Secondary feasibility outcomes include time to research ethics board (REB) approval and readiness to trial initiation (?3 months from REB submission and approval). Primary (composite of death or re-admission to hospital in first 90 days of index hospitalisation) and secondary clinical outcomes for the future large FLUID trial will be described. Protocol adherence will be collected by site at specified time points. All clinical data will be obtained at patient level through provincial health administrative data held at the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences (ICES). Event rates for the primary and secondary outcomes will be described using frequencies and proportions with 95% CIs. Intracluster and interperiod correlation coefficients will be calculated from population-level data available at ICES. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:The study protocol has been approved by the Ottawa Health Science Research Ethics Board. The FLUID pilot will determine feasibility, and ICES data across all potential sites in Ontario will allow calculation of sample size parameter estimates to inform the design and implementation of the large trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:NCT02721485; Pre-results.

SUBMITTER: McIntyre L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6112401 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

FLUID trial: a protocol for a hospital-wide open-label cluster crossover pragmatic comparative effectiveness randomised pilot trial.

McIntyre Lauralyn L Taljaard Monica M McArdle Tracy T Fox-Robichaud Alison A English Shane W SW Martin Claudio C Marshall John J Menon Kusum K Muscedere John J Cook Deborah J DJ Weijer Charles C Saginur Raphael R Maybee Alies A Iyengar Akshai A Forster Alan A Graham Ian D ID Hawken Steven S McCartney Colin C Seely Andrew Je AJ Stiell Ian G IG Thavorn Kednapa K Fergusson Dean A DA

BMJ open 20180823 8

<h4>Introduction</h4>0.9% saline and Ringer's lactate are the two most common resuscitation crystalloid fluids. 0.9% saline may lead to hyperchloraemic metabolic acidosis and may be associated with impaired kidney function and death. Few large multicentre randomised trials have been conducted to evaluate the effect of these two fluids on clinically important outcomes.<h4>Methods</h4>FLUID is a pragmatic pilot cluster randomised crossover trial in which four hospitals will be randomised to normal ...[more]

PMID: 30139908

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesNormal saline (NS) and Ringer's lactate (RL) are the most common crystalloids used for fluid therapy. Despite evidence of possible harm associated with NS (eg, hyperchloremic metabolic acidosis, impaired kidney function and death), few large multi-centre randomised trials have evaluated the effect of these fluids on clinically important outcomes. We conducted a pilot trial to explore the feasibility of a large trial powered for clinically important outcomes.DesignFLUID was a pragmatic pilot cluster randomised cross-over trial.SettingFour hospitals in the province of Ontario, Canada PARTICIPANTS: All hospitalised adult and paediatric patients with an incident admission to the hospital over the course of each study period.InterventionsA hospital wide policy/strategy which stocked either NS or RL throughout the hospital for 12 weeks before crossing over to the alternate fluid for the subsequent 12 weeks.Primary and secondary outcome measuresThe primary feasibility outcome was study fluid protocol adherence. Secondary feasibility outcomes included time to Research Ethics Board (REB) approval and trial initiation. Primary (composite of death or re-admission to hospital in first 90 days of index hospitalisation) and secondary clinical outcomes were analysed descriptively.ResultsAmong 24 905 included patients, mean age 59.1 (SD 20.5); 13 977 (56.1%) were female and 21 150 (85.0%) had medical or surgical admitting diagnoses. Overall, 96 821 L were administered in the NS arm, and 78 348 L in the RL arm. Study fluid adherence to NS and RL was 93.7% (site range: 91.6%-98.0%) and 79.8% (site range: 72.5%-83.9%), respectively. Time to REB approval ranged from 2 to 48 days and readiness for trial initiation from 51 to 331 days. 5544 (22.3%) patients died or required hospital re-admission in the first 90 days.ConclusionsThe future large trial is feasible. Anticipating and addressing logistical challenges during the planning stages will be imperative.Trial registration numberNCT02721485.

Project description:Implementation research is concerned with bridging the gap between evidence and practice through the study of methods to promote the uptake of research into routine practice. Good quality evidence has been summarised into guideline recommendations to show that peri-operative fasting times could be considerably shorter than patients currently experience. The objective of this trial was to evaluate the effectiveness of three strategies for the implementation of recommendations about peri-operative fasting.A pragmatic cluster randomised trial underpinned by the PARIHS framework was conducted during 2006 to 2009 with a national sample of UK hospitals using time series with mixed methods process evaluation and cost analysis. Hospitals were randomised to one of three interventions: standard dissemination (SD) of a guideline package, SD plus a web-based resource championed by an opinion leader, and SD plus plan-do-study-act (PDSA). The primary outcome was duration of fluid fast prior to induction of anaesthesia. Secondary outcomes included duration of food fast, patients' experiences, and stakeholders' experiences of implementation, including influences. ANOVA was used to test differences over time and interventions.Nineteen acute NHS hospitals participated. Across timepoints, 3,505 duration of fasting observations were recorded. No significant effect of the interventions was observed for either fluid or food fasting times. The effect size was 0.33 for the web-based intervention compared to SD alone for the change in fluid fasting and was 0.12 for PDSA compared to SD alone. The process evaluation showed different types of impact, including changes to practices, policies, and attitudes. A rich picture of the implementation challenges emerged, including inter-professional tensions and a lack of clarity for decision-making authority and responsibility.This was a large, complex study and one of the first national randomised controlled trials conducted within acute care in implementation research. The evidence base for fasting practice was accepted by those participating in this study and the messages from it simple; however, implementation and practical challenges influenced the interventions' impact. A set of conditions for implementation emerges from the findings of this study, which are presented as theoretically transferable propositions that have international relevance.ISRCTN18046709--Peri-operative Implementation Study Evaluation (POISE).

Project description:ObjectivesTo compare the benefits of a tight-control/treat-to-target strategy (TC/T2T) in axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) with those of usual care (UC).MethodsPragmatic, prospective, cluster-randomised, controlled, open, 1-year trial (NCT03043846). 18 centres were randomised (1:1). Patients met Axial Spondylo Arthritis International Society (ASAS) criteria for axSpA, had an Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) ≥2.1, received non-optimal treatment by non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and were biologic-naive.Interventions(1) TC/T2T: visits every 4 weeks and prespecified strategy based on treatment intensification until achieving target (ie, ASDAS <2.1); (2) UC: visits every 12 weeks and treatment at the rheumatologist's discretion.Main outcomePercentage of patients with a ≥30% improvement on the ASAS-Health Index (ASAS-HI). Other efficacy outcomes and adverse events were recorded. A health economic evaluation was performed.Statistical analysisTwo-level mixed models were used to estimate efficacy outcomes. Cost-effectiveness was assessed by the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained for TC/T2T versus UC.Results160 patients were included (80/group). Mean (SD) age was 37.9 (11.0) years and disease duration was 3.7 (6.2) years; 51.2% were men. ASDAS at inclusion was 3.0 (0.7), and ASAS-HI was 8.6 (3.7). ASAS-HI improved by ≥30% in 47.3% of the TC/T2T arm and in 36.1% of those receiving UC (non-significant). All secondary efficacy outcomes were more frequent in the TC/T2T arm, although not all statistically significant. Safety was similar in both arms. From a societal perspective, TC/T2T resulted in an additional 0.04 QALY, and saved €472 compared with UC.ConclusionTC/T2T was not significantly superior to UC for the primary outcome, while many secondary efficacy outcomes favoured it, had a similar safety profile and was favourable from a societal health economic perspective.Trial registration numberNCT03043846.

Project description:BackgroundAcute otitis media (AOM) is associated with high antibiotic prescribing rates. Antibiotics are somewhat effective in improving pain and middle ear effusion (MEE); however, they have unfavourable effects. Alternative treatments, such as corticosteroids as anti-inflammatory agents, are needed. Evidence for the efficacy of these remains inconclusive. We conducted a pilot study to test feasibility of a proposed large-scale randomised controlled trial (RCT) to assess the efficacy of corticosteroids for AOM.MethodsWe conducted a pilot, pragmatic, parallel, open-label RCT of oral corticosteroids for paediatric AOM in primary and secondary/tertiary care centres in Indonesia. Children aged 6 months-12 years with AOM were randomised to either prednisolone or control (1:1). Physicians were blinded to allocation. Our objectives were to test the feasibility of our full RCT procedures and design, and assess the mechanistic effect of corticosteroids, using tympanometry, in suppressing middle ear inflammation by reducing MEE.ResultsWe screened 512 children; 62 (38%) of 161 eligible children were randomised and 60 were analysed for the primary clinical outcome. All study procedures were completed successfully by healthcare personnel and parents/caregivers, despite time constraints and high workload. All eligible, consenting children were appropriately randomised. One child did not take the medication and four received additional oral corticosteroids. Our revised sample size calculation verified 444 children are needed for the full RCT. Oral corticosteroids did not have any discernible effects on MEE resolution and duration. There was no correlation between pain or other symptoms and MEE change. However, prednisolone may reduce pain intensity at day 3 (Visual Analogue Scale mean difference - 7.4 mm, 95% confidence interval (CI) - 13.4 to - 1.3, p = 0.018), but cause drowsiness (relative risk (RR) 1.8, 95% CI 1.1 to 2.8, p = 0.016). Tympanometry curves at day 7 may be improved (RR 1.8, 95% CI 1.0 to 2.9). We cannot yet confirm these as effects of corticosteroids due to insufficient sample size in this pilot study.ConclusionsIt is feasible to conduct a large, pragmatic RCT of corticosteroids for paediatric AOM in Indonesia. Although oral corticosteroids may reduce pain and improve tympanometry curves, it requires an adequately powered clinical trial to confirm this.Trial registrationStudy registry number: ACTRN12618000049279. Name of registry: the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR). Date of registration: 16 January 2018.

Project description:IntroductionDiabetes mellitus and diabetic nephropathy (DN) are prevalent and costly to manage. DN is the leading cause of end-stage kidney disease. Conventional therapy blocking the renin-angiotensin system has only achieved limited effect in preserving renal function. Recent observational data show that the use of Chinese medicine (CM), a major form of traditional medicine used extensively in Asia, could reduce the risk of end-stage kidney disease. However, existing clinical practice guidelines are weakly evidence-based and the effect of CM remains unclear. This trial explores the effect of an existing integrative Chinese-Western medicine protocol for the management of DN.ObjectiveTo optimise parameters and assess the feasibility for a subsequent phase III randomised controlled trial through preliminary evaluation on the effect of an adjuvant semi-individualised CM treatment protocol on patients with type 2 diabetes with stages 2-3 chronic kidney disease and macroalbuminuria.Methods and analysisThis is an assessor-blind, add-on, randomised, controlled, parallel, multicentre, open-label pilot pragmatic clinical trial. 148 patients diagnosed with DN will be recruited and randomised 1:1 to a 48-week additional semi-individualised CM treatment programme or standard medical care. Primary end points are the changes in estimated glomerular filtration rate and spot urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio between baseline and treatment end point. Secondary end points include fasting blood glucose, glycated haemoglobin, brain natriuretic peptide, fasting insulin, C peptide, fibroblast growth factor 23, urinary monocyte chemotactic protein-1, cystatin C, nephrin, transforming growth factor-β1 and vascular endothelial growth factor. Adverse events are monitored through self-completed questionnaire and clinical visits. Outcomes will be analysed by regression models. Enrolment started in July 2015.Ethics and registrationThis protocol is approved by the Institutional Review Board of the University of Hong Kong/Hospital Authority Hong Kong West Cluster (reference number UW 14-301).Trial registration numberNCT02488252.

Dataset Information

FLUID trial: a protocol for a hospital-wide open-label cluster crossover pragmatic comparative effectiveness randomised pilot trial.

Publications

FLUID trial: a protocol for a hospital-wide open-label cluster crossover pragmatic comparative effectiveness randomised pilot trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets