Dataset Information

Multicentre observational study on practice of ventilation in brain injured patients: the VENTIBRAIN study protocol.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Mechanical ventilatory is a crucial element of acute brain injured patients' management. The ventilatory goals to ensure lung protection during acute respiratory failure may not be adequate in case of concomitant brain injury. Therefore, there are limited data from which physicians can draw conclusions regarding optimal ventilator management in this setting.

Methods and analysis

This is an international multicentre prospective observational cohort study. The aim of the 'multicentre observational study on practice of ventilation in brain injured patients'-the VENTIBRAIN study-is to describe the current practice of ventilator settings and mechanical ventilation in acute brain injured patients. Secondary objectives include the description of ventilator settings among different countries, and their association with outcomes. Inclusion criteria will be adult patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) with a diagnosis of traumatic brain injury or cerebrovascular diseases (intracranial haemorrhage, subarachnoid haemorrhage, ischaemic stroke), requiring intubation and mechanical ventilation and admission to the ICU. Exclusion criteria will be the following: patients aged <18 years; pregnant patients; patients not intubated or not mechanically ventilated or receiving only non-invasive ventilation. Data related to clinical examination, neuromonitoring if available, ventilator settings and arterial blood gases will be recorded at admission and daily for the first 7 days and then at day 10 and 14. The Glasgow Outcome Scale Extended on mortality and neurological outcome will be collected at discharge from ICU, hospital and at 6 months follow-up.

Ethics and dissemination

The study has been approved by the Ethic committee of Brianza at the Azienda Socio Sanitaria Territoriale-Monza. Data will be disseminated to the scientific community by abstracts submitted to the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine annual conference and by original articles submitted to peer-reviewed journals.

Trial registration number

NCT04459884.

SUBMITTER: Robba C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8359464 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionMajor haemorrhage after injury is the leading cause of preventable death for trauma patients. Recent advancements in trauma care suggest damage control resuscitation (DCR) should start in the prehospital phase following major trauma. In Italy, Helicopter Emergency Medical Services (HEMS) assist the most complex injuries and deliver the most advanced interventions including DCR. The effect size of DCR delivered prehospitally on survival remains however unclear.Methods and analysisThis is an investigator-initiated, large, national, prospective, observational cohort study aiming to recruit >500 patients in haemorrhagic shock after major trauma. We aim at describing the current practice of hypotensive trauma management as well as propose the creation of a national registry of patients with haemorrhagic shock.Primary objectivethe exploration of the effect size of the variation in clinical practice on the mortality of hypotensive trauma patients. The primary outcome measure will be 24 hours, 7-day and 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes include: association of prehospital factors and survival from injury to hospital admission, hospital length of stay, prehospital and in-hospital complications, hospital outcomes; use of prehospital ultrasound; association of prehospital factors and volume of first 24-hours blood product administration and evaluation of the prevalence of use, appropriateness, haemodynamic, metabolic and effects on mortality of prehospital blood transfusions.Inclusion criteriaage >18 years, traumatic injury attended by a HEMS team including a physician, a systolic blood pressure <90 mm Hg or weak/absent radial pulse and a confirmed or clinically likely diagnosis of major haemorrhage. Prehospital and in-hospital variables will be collected to include key times, clinical findings, examinations and interventions. Patients will be followed-up until day 30 from admission. The Glasgow Outcome Scale Extended will be collected at 30 days from admission.Ethics and disseminationThe study has been approved by the Ethics committee 'Comitato Etico di Area Vasta Emilia Centro'. Data will be disseminated to the scientific community by abstracts submitted to international conferences and by original articles submitted to peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration numberNCT04760977.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is the first cause of healthcare-associated infections in intensive care units (ICUs) and brain injury is one of the main risk factors for early-onset VAP. Antibiotic prophylaxis has been reported to decrease their occurrence in brain-injured patients, but a lack of controlled randomised trials and the risk of induction of bacterial resistance explain the low level of recommendations. The goal of this study is to determine whether a single dose of ceftriaxone within the 12?hours postintubation after severe brain injury can decrease the risk of early-onset VAP. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:The PROPHY-VAP is a French multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, clinical trial. Adult brain-injured patients (n=320) with a Glasgow Coma Scale ?12, requiring mechanical ventilation for more than 48?hours, are randomised to receive either a single dose of ceftriaxone 2?g or a placebo within the 12?hours after tracheal intubation. The primary endpoint is the proportion of patients developing VAP from the 2nd to the 7th day after mechanical ventilation. Secondary endpoints include the proportion of patients developing late VAP (>7 days after tracheal intubation), the number of ventilator-free days, VAP-free days and antibiotic-free days, length of stay in the ICU, proportion of patients with ventilator-associated events and mortality during their ICU stay. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:The initial research project was approved by the Institutional Review Board of OUEST III (France) on 20 October 2014 (registration No 2014-001668-36) and carried out according to the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and the Clinical Trials Directive 2001/20/EC of the European Parliament relating to the Good Clinical Practice guidelines. The results of this study will be presented in national and international meetings and published in an international peer-reviewed journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:NCT02265406; Pre-results.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Current evidence on epidemiology and outcomes of invasively mechanically ventilated intensive care unit (ICU) patients is predominantly gathered in resource-rich settings. Patient casemix and patterns of critical illnesses, and probably also ventilation practices are likely to be different in resource-limited settings. We aim to investigate the epidemiological characteristics, ventilation practices and clinical outcomes of patients receiving mechanical ventilation in ICUs in Asia. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:PRoVENT-iMIC (study of PRactice of VENTilation in Middle-Income Countries) is an international multicentre observational study to be undertaken in approximately 60 ICUs in 11 Asian countries. Consecutive patients aged 18 years or older who are receiving invasive ventilation in participating ICUs during a predefined 28-day period are to be enrolled, with a daily follow-up of 7 days. The primary outcome is ventilatory management (including tidal volume expressed as mL/kg predicted body weight and positive end-expiratory pressure expressed as cm H2O) during the first 3?days of mechanical ventilation-compared between patients at no risk for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), patients at risk for ARDS and in patients with ARDS (in case the diagnosis of ARDS can be made on admission). Secondary outcomes include occurrence of pulmonary complications and all-cause ICU mortality. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:PRoVENT-iMIC will be the first international study that prospectively assesses ventilation practices, outcomes and epidemiology of invasively ventilated patients in ICUs in Asia. The results of this large study, to be disseminated through conference presentations and publications in international peer-reviewed journals, are of ultimate importance when designing trials of invasive ventilation in resource-limited ICUs. Access to source data will be made available through national or international anonymised datasets on request and after agreement of the PRoVENT-iMIC steering committee. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:NCT03188770; Pre-results.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Patient-ventilator asynchrony is common in mechanically ventilated patients and may be related to adverse outcomes. Few studies have reported the occurrence of asynchrony in brain-injured patients. We aimed to investigate the prevalence, type and severity of patient-ventilator asynchrony in mechanically ventilated patients with brain injury. METHODS:This prospective observational study enrolled acute brain-injured patients undergoing mechanical ventilation. Esophageal pressure monitoring was established after enrollment. Flow, airway pressure, and esophageal pressure-time waveforms were recorded for a 15-min interval, four times daily for 3 days, for visually detecting asynchrony by offline analysis. At the end of each dataset recording, the respiratory drive was determined by the airway occlusion maneuver. The asynchrony index was calculated to represent the severity. The relationship between the prevalence and the severity of asynchrony with ventilatory modes and settings, respiratory drive, and analgesia and sedation were determined. Association of severe patient-ventilator asynchrony, which was defined as an asynchrony index ???10%, with clinical outcomes was analyzed. RESULTS:In 100 enrolled patients, a total of 1076 15-min waveform datasets covering 330,292 breaths were collected, in which 70,156 (38%) asynchronous breaths were detected. Asynchrony occurred in 96% of patients with the median (interquartile range) asynchrony index of 12.4% (4.3%-26.4%). The most prevalent type was ineffective triggering. No significant difference was found in either prevalence or asynchrony index among different classifications of brain injury (p?>?0.05). The prevalence of asynchrony was significantly lower during pressure control/assist ventilation than during other ventilatory modes (p?<?0.05). Compared to the datasets without asynchrony, the airway occlusion pressure was significantly lower in datasets with ineffective triggering (p?<?0.001). The asynchrony index was significantly higher during the combined use of opioids and sedatives (p?<?0.001). Significantly longer duration of ventilation and hospital length of stay after the inclusion were found in patients with severe ineffective triggering (p?<?0.05). CONCLUSIONS:Patient-ventilator asynchrony is common in brain-injured patients. The most prevalent type is ineffective triggering and its severity is likely related to a long duration of ventilation and hospital stay. Prevalence and severity of asynchrony are associated with ventilatory modes, respiratory drive and analgesia/sedation strategy, suggesting treatment adjustment in this particular population. Trial registration The study has been registered on 4 July 2017 in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03212482) ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03212482 ).

Project description:IntroductionResearch supports the use of specific strategies to discontinue mechanical ventilation (MV) in critically ill patients. Little is known about how clinicians actually wean and discontinue MV in practice or the association between different discontinuation strategies and outcomes. The primary objective of this study is to describe international practices in the use of (1) daily screening for readiness to discontinue MV, (2) modes of MV used before initial discontinuation attempts, (3) weaning and spontaneous breathing trial (SBT) protocols, (4) SBT techniques and (5) sedation and mobilisation practices to facilitate weaning and discontinuation. The secondary objectives are to identify patient characteristics and time-dependent factors associated with use of selected strategies, investigate associations between SBT outcome (failure vs success) and outcomes, explore differences between patients who undergo an SBT early versus later in their intensive care unit (ICU) stay, and investigate the associations between different SBT techniques and humidification strategies on outcomes.Methods and analysisWe will conduct an international, prospective, observational study of MV discontinuation practices among critically ill adults who receive invasive MV for at least 24 hours at approximately 150 ICUs in six geographic regions (Canada, USA, UK, Europe, India and Australia/New Zealand). Research personnel at participating ICUs will collect demographic data, data to characterise the initial strategy or event that facilitated discontinuation of MV (direct extubation, direct tracheostomy, initial successful SBT, initial failed SBT or death before any attempt could be made), clinical outcomes and site information. We aim to collect data on at least 10 non-death discontinuation events in each ICU (at least 1500 non-death discontinuation events).Ethics and disseminationThis study received Research Ethics Approval from St. Michael's Hospital (11-024) Research ethics approval will be sought from all participating sites. The results will be disseminated through publications in peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration numberNCT03955874.

Project description:BackgroundThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is rapidly expanding across the world, with more than 100,000 new cases each day as of end-June 2020. Healthcare workers are struggling to provide the best care for COVID-19 patients. Approaches for invasive ventilation vary widely between and within countries and new insights are acquired rapidly. We aim to investigate invasive ventilation practices and outcome in COVID-19 patients in the Netherlands.MethodsPRoVENT-COVID ('study of PRactice of VENTilation in COVID-19') is an investigator-initiated national, multicenter observational study to be undertaken in intensive care units (ICUs) in The Netherlands. Consecutive COVID-19 patients aged 18 years or older, who are receiving invasive ventilation in the participating ICUs, are to be enrolled during a 10-week period, with a daily follow-up of 7 days. The primary outcome is ventilatory management (including tidal volume expressed as mL/kg predicted body weight and positive end-expiratory pressure expressed as cmH2O) during the first 3 days of ventilation. Secondary outcomes include other ventilatory variables, use of rescue therapies for refractory hypoxemia such as prone positioning and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, use of sedatives, vasopressors and inotropes; daily cumulative fluid balances; acute kidney injury; ventilator-free days and alive at day 28 (VFD-28), duration of ICU and hospital stay, and ICU, hospital and 90-day mortality.DiscussionPRoVENT-COVID will be the largest observational study to date, with high density ventilatory data and major outcomes. There is urgent need for a better understanding of ventilation practices, and the effects of ventilator settings on outcomes in COVID-19 patients. The results of PRoVENT-COVID will be rapidly disseminated through electronic presentations, such as webinars and electronic conferences, and publications in international peer-reviewed journals. Access to source data will be made available through local, regional and national anonymized datasets on request, and after agreement of the PRoVENT-COVID steering committee.Trial registrationPRoVENT-COVID is registered at clinicaltrials.gov (identifier NCT04346342).

Project description:BackgroundPalliative sedation involves the intentional lowering of consciousness at the end of life. It can be initiated to relieve a patient's burden caused by refractory symptoms at the end of life. The impact of palliative sedation needs to be clinically monitored to adjust the proper dose and regimen of sedative medication to ensure that patients are at ease and comfortable at the end of their lives. Although there is consensus among health care professionals and within guidelines that efficacy of palliative sedation needs to be closely monitored, there is no agreement about how, when, and by whom, this monitoring should be performed. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effects of palliative sedation by measuring the discomfort levels and sedation/agitation levels of the patients at regular timepoints. In addition, the clinical trajectories of those patients receiving palliative sedation will be monitored and recorded.MethodsThe study is an international prospective non-experimental observational multicentre study. Patients are recruited from in-patient palliative care settings in Belgium, Germany, Italy, Spain and the Netherlands. Adult patients with advanced cancer are monitored by using proxy observations of discomfort (DS-DAT) and depth of sedation/agitation levels (RASS-PAL) during palliative sedation. After the palliative sedation period, the care for the specific participant case is evaluated by one of the attending health care professionals and one relative via a questionnaire.DiscussionThis study will be the first international prospective multicenter study evaluating the clinical practice of palliative sedation including observations of discomfort levels and levels of sedation. It will provide valuable information about the practice of palliative sedation in European countries in terminally ill cancer patients. Results from this study will facilitate the formulation of recommendations for clinical practice on how to improve monitoring and comfort in patients receiving palliative sedation.Trial registrationThis study is registered at Clinicaltrials.gov since January 22, 2021, registration number: NCT04719702.

Project description:BackgroundDisorders of consciousness (DoC) are severe neurological conditions in which consciousness is impaired to various degrees. They are caused by injury or malfunction of neural systems regulating arousal and awareness. Over the last decades, major efforts in improving and individualizing diagnostic and prognostic accuracy for patients affected by DoC have been made, mainly focusing on introducing multimodal assessments to complement behavioral examination. The present EU-funded multicentric research project "PerBrain" is aimed at developing an individualized diagnostic hierarchical pathway guided by both behavior and multimodal neurodiagnostics for DoC patients.MethodsIn this project, each enrolled patient undergoes repetitive behavioral, clinical, and neurodiagnostic assessments according to a patient-tailored multi-layer workflow. Multimodal diagnostic acquisitions using state-of-the-art techniques at different stages of the patients' clinical evolution are performed. The techniques applied comprise well-established behavioral scales, innovative neurophysiological techniques (such as quantitative electroencephalography and transcranial magnetic stimulation combined with electroencephalography), structural and resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging, and measurements of physiological activity (i.e. nasal airflow respiration). In addition, the well-being and treatment decision attitudes of patients' informal caregivers (primarily family members) are investigated. Patient and caregiver assessments are performed at multiple time points within one year after acquired brain injury, starting at the acute disease phase.DiscussionAccurate classification and outcome prediction of DoC are of crucial importance for affected patients as well as their caregivers, as individual rehabilitation strategies and treatment decisions are critically dependent on the latter. The PerBrain project aims at optimizing individual DoC diagnosis and accuracy of outcome prediction by integrating data from the suggested multimodal examination methods into a personalized hierarchical diagnosis and prognosis procedure. Using the parallel tracking of both patients' neurological status and their caregivers' mental situation, well-being, and treatment decision attitudes from the acute to the chronic phase of the disease and across different countries, this project aims at significantly contributing to the current clinical routine of DoC patients and their family members.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04798456 . Registered 15 March 2021 - Retrospectively registered.

Project description:IntroductionChiari 1 malformation (CM1) is a structural abnormality of the hindbrain characterised by the descent of the cerebellar tonsils through the foramen magnum. The management of patients with CM1 remains contentious since there are currently no UK or international guidelines for clinicians. We therefore propose a collaborative, prospective, multicentre study on the investigation, management and outcome of CM1 in the UK: the UK Chiari 1 Study (UKC1S). Our primary objective is to determine the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with a new diagnosis of CM1 managed either conservatively or surgically at 12 months of follow-up. We also aim to: (A) determine HRQoL 12 months following surgery; (B) measure complications 12 months following surgery; (C) determine the natural history of patients with CM1 treated conservatively without surgery; (D) determine the radiological correlates of presenting symptoms, signs and outcomes; and (E) determine the scope and variation within UK practice in referral patterns, patient pathways, investigations and surgical decisions.Methods and analysisThe UKC1S will be a prospective, multicentre and observational study that will follow the British Neurosurgical Trainee Research Collaborative model of collaborative research. Patients will be recruited after attending their first neurosurgical outpatient clinic appointment. Follow-up data will be collected from all patients at 12 months from baseline regardless of whether they are treated surgically or not. A further 12-month postoperative follow-up timepoint will be added for patients treated with decompressive surgery. The study is expected to last three years.Ethics and disseminationThe UKC1S received a favourable ethical opinion from the East Midlands Leicester South Research Ethics Committee (REC reference: 20/EM/0053; IRAS 269739) and the Health Research Authority. The results of the study will be published in peer-reviewed medical journals, presented at scientific conferences, shared with collaborating sites and shared with participant patients if they so wish.