Dataset Information

Phenobarbital for the management of severe acute alcohol withdrawal (the PHENOMANAL trial): a pilot randomized controlled trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Benzodiazepines are considered first-line treatment for patients experiencing severe acute alcohol withdrawal syndrome (sAAWS). Although several medications have been evaluated as potential adjuvant treatments for sAAWS, barbiturates show particular promise.

Objective

In the PHENOMANAL trial, we will assess the feasibility of conducting an allocation-concealed, quadruple-blinded, randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing symptom-triggered benzodiazepine therapy with either a single dose of adjuvant intravenous (IV) phenobarbital (7.5 mg/kg of ideal body weight) or a single dose of matching IV placebo for patients with sAAWS.

Methods

We will recruit adult patients from the Emergency Department, Intensive Care Unit, or hospital wards with a Clinical Institute of Withdrawal - Adult revised (CIWA-Ar) score of 16 or more after receipt of at least 60 mg of diazepam or equivalent within 16 h of diagnosis of sAAWS, and an anticipated need for hospitalization. We will randomize participants (n=39) in a 2:1 manner to treatment and placebo groups, respectively. The primary objective of the PHENOMANAL pilot trial will be to demonstrate our ability to recruit the desired population over the trial period. As secondary objectives, we will evaluate clinician compliance with the treatment protocols, assess crossover rates from the placebo arm to the treatment arm, and obtain preliminary estimates of treatment effect. All trial participants will be followed for 7 days or until hospital discharge.

Relevance

The PHENOMANAL trial is novel in investigating a new treatment for a common and understudied condition, repurposing an existing medication for a novel indication, and addressing an important evidence gap. Through conduct of the multidisciplinary pilot trial, we aim to advance methodology in acute care research through the use of a hybrid consent model and inform the design of a large-scale trial.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Registration NCT03586089 ; first registered July 13, 2018.

SUBMITTER: Filewod N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8783453 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Few randomized controlled trials (RCTs) report interventions targeting improvement of frailty status as an outcome.This RCT enrolled 117 older adults (65-79?years of age) in Toufen, Taiwan who scored 3-6 on The Chinese Canadian Study of Health and Aging Clinical Frailty Scale Telephone Version and then score ?1 on the Cardiovascular Health Study Phenotypic Classification of Frailty (CHS_PCF). With a two by two factorial design, subjects were randomly assigned to interventions (Exercise and nutrition, EN, n?=?55 or problem solving therapy, PST, n?=?57) or controls (non-EN, n?=?62 or non-PST, n?=?60). Educational booklets were provided to all. EN group subjects received nutrition consultation and a thrice-weekly exercise-training program while PST group subjects received 6 sessions in 3?month. Subjects were followed at 3, 6, and 12?months. Primary outcome was improvement of the CHS_PCF by at least one category (from pre-frail to robust, or from frail to pre-frail or robust) from baseline assessments. One hundred and one completed final assessments. Intention-to-treat analysis with the generalized estimating equation model was applied with adjustment for time and treatment-by-time interactions.Mean age was 71.4?±?3.7?years, with 59% females. Baseline characteristic were generally comparable between groups. EN group subjects had a higher improvement rate on the primary outcome than non-EN group subjects (45% vs 27%, adjusted p?=?0.008) at 3?months, but not 6 or 12?months. They also had more increase of serum 25(OH) vitamin D level (4.9?±?7.7 vs 1.2?±?5.4, p?=?0.006) and lower percentage of osteopenia (74% vs 89% p?=?0.042) at 12?months. PST group subjects had better improvement (2.7?±?6.1 vs 0.2?±?6.7, p?=?0.035, 6-month) and less deterioration (-3.5?±?9.7 vs -7.1?±?8.7, p?=?0.036, 12-month) of dominant leg extension power than non-PST subjects. Some secondary outcomes were also improved in control groups (non-EN or non-PST). No adverse effects were reported.The three-month EN intervention resulted in short-term (3-month) frailty status improvement and long-term effect on bone mineral density and serum vitamin D (12-month) among Taiwanese community-dwelling elders. The effect of PST was less pronounced.ClinicalTrials.gov: EC0970301