Dataset Information

Evaluation of the effect of perioperative administration of S(+)-ketamine hydrochloride injection for postoperative acute pain in children: study protocol for a prospective, multicenter, randomized, open-label, parallel-group, pragmatic clinical trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Inadequate postoperative pain management increases the risk of adverse events after the surgery and aggressive perioperative pain prevention has both short-term and long-term benefits. S(+)-ketamine is an N-methyl-D-aspartic acid (NMDA) receptor antagonist with a strong analgesic effect and can significantly relieve postoperative acute pain and reduce opioid consumption. However, for children, it still needs to be confirmed by large sample clinical studies.

Methods

This is a pragmatic, randomized controlled trial which will evaluate the effect of perioperative administration of S(+)-ketamine hydrochloride injection for postoperative acute pain in children in a pragmatic clinical setting. A total of 3000 children (≤17 years old) undergoing surgery will be included in this protocol. Subjects will be randomized 2:1 to either receive S(+)-ketamine hydrochloride injection or conventional therapy without S(+)-ketamine during the entire perioperative period. The primary endpoints are the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve of Face Legs Activity Cry and Consolability (FLACC, 0-7 years old) scale score or Numerical Rating Scale (NRS, 8-17 years old) score within 48 h after surgery, and the consumption of opioids within 48 h after surgery. The secondary endpoints include the time of first use of rescue analgesics after surgery, rescue analgesia rate within 48 h after surgery, anesthesia recovery time, incidence of emergency delirium (for 0-7 years old), changes of anxiety and depression scale scores at 48 h after surgery (for 8-17 years old), incidence of intraoperative adverse events (AEs), and incidence of postoperative AEs and pharmacoeconomic indicators. AEs and serious AEs were recorded to evaluate safety.

Discussion

This trial will be the first pragmatic clinical trial to prospectively assess the effect of perioperative administration of S(+)-ketamine hydrochloride injection for postoperative acute pain in children, which is of great significance to the continuous optimization of clinical anesthesia and analgesia programs for children.

Trial registration

This trial was registered in the U.S. National Institutes of Health ClinicalTrials.gov database ( http://clinicaltrials.gov ; Registration number: NCT04834427). Registered on 8 April 2021.

SUBMITTER: Wang H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9308221 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionPostoperative pain remains incompletely controlled for decades. Recently, multimodal analgesia is emerging as a potential approach in the management of postoperative pain. Therein, S(+)-ketamine is appealing as an adjuvant drug in multimodal analgesia due to its unique pharmacological advantages. This pragmatic clinical trial (SAFE-SK-A trial) is designed to investigate the analgesic effect and safety of S(+)-ketamine for acute postoperative pain in adults and explore the optimal strategy of perioperative intravenous S(+)-ketamine in a real-world setting.Methods and analysisThis multicentre, randomised, open-label, positive-controlled, pragmatic clinical trial (SAFE-SK-A study) is planned to conduct in 80 centres from China and recruit a total of 12 000 adult participants undergoing a surgical procedure under general anaesthesia. Patient recruitment started in June 2021 and will end in June 2022. Participants will be randomised in a ratio of 2:1 to either receive perioperative intravenous S(+)-ketamine plus conventional anaesthesia or conventional anaesthesia only. Given the pragmatic nature of the study, no specific restriction as to the administration dosage, route, time, synergistic regimen or basic analgesics. Primary endpoints are the area under the broken line of Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) scores for pain intensity and the total opioid consumption within 48 hours postoperative. Secondary endpoints are postoperative NRS scores, the anaesthesia recovery time, time of first rescue analgesia, the incidence of rescue analgesia, the incidence of postoperative delirium, patient questionnaire for effect, changes from baseline in cognitive function and anxiety and depression, as well as the adverse events and pharmacoeconomic outcomes. The general linear model will be used for the primary endpoint, and appropriate methods will be used for the secondary endpoints.Ethics and disseminationThis trial has been approved by the local Institutional Review Board (S2021-026-02) and conducted following the Declaration of Helsinki. Results of this trial will be publicly disclosed and published in scientific journals.Trial registration numberNCT04837170; Pre-results.

Project description:BackgroundEye-drop administration errors occur in the majority of patients and increase the risk for treatment failure or systemic adverse events. While lacking knowledge is the principal error cause, most patients overestimate their skills and are unaware of often substantial knowledge gaps. Therefore, the impact of including motivational patient education on long-term eye-drop administration skills of patients was investigated.MethodsThis is a cluster-randomized controlled trial in German community pharmacies. Patient education in both groups comprised observation of the patient during eye-drop administration to identify individual errors, pharmaceutical counseling, and teach-back evaluation of the training. In the intervention group, motivational communication techniques were included to increase error awareness and readiness for patient education. In addition, intervention patients were trained on repeated errors until administration was performed correctly. In contrast, patients in the control group only received feedback on erroneous administration steps without another assessment and reinforced training.ResultsIn total, 152 adult patients were eligible to the study and 91 patients (intervention group N = 46) agreed to participate in a 1-month, 6-month, and 12-month follow-up. Patient education significantly increased the proportion of patients correctly administering eye-drops from 6% (7 out of 56 intervention patients, 1 out of 82 control patients) at baseline to 35% (12 out of 30 intervention patients, 12 out of 39 control patients, p ≤ 0.001) at the 1-month follow-up, and 64% (11 out of 15 intervention patients, 17 out of 29 control patients, p ≤ 0.001) at the 6-month follow-up irrespective of group allocation. In some patients previously resolved errors recurred during follow-up visits. This emphasizes the need for periodical reevaluation of patient administration skills and the provision of prevention strategies besides education.ConclusionPatient education that included demonstration of administration skills and verbal and written counseling on observed errors improved eye-drop administration skills irrespective of the communication technique applied. Whereof, high drop-out rates limited the power to detect a difference between groups. In particular, periodic demonstration of administration skills seemed important for sustainable improvement of administration skills. However, further error prevention strategies such as additional education materials or support by a caregiver may be necessary in some patients.

Project description:This study compared palonosetron and ondansetron as rescue medications for postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in patients who received prophylactic ondansetron. Although guidelines recommend use of an agent from a different class when prophylaxis has failed, palonosetron has unique properties relative to other serotonin 5-HT3 receptor antagonists. Prior trials assessing its use for rescue have had conflicting results. Although palonosetron has compared favorably with ondansetron for PONV prevention, the drugs have not been compared in the rescue setting of failure of 5-HT3 receptor antagonist prophylaxis.This was a randomized, open-label, multicenter trial comparing the efficacy and safety of intravenous palonosetron 0.075 mg and intravenous ondansetron 4 mg in patients experiencing PONV following laparoscopic abdominal or gynecological surgery despite prophylactic ondansetron.Of 239 patients screened, 220 were enrolled and 98 were treated for PONV: 48 and 50 in the palonosetron and ondansetron arms, respectively. Complete control during 72 hours after study drug administration was achieved in 25.0% of palonosetron recipients and 18.0% of ondansetron recipients (95% confidence interval [CI], -9.2, 23.3; p?=?0.40). Corresponding incidences of vomiting were 29.2% for palonosetron and 48.0% for ondansetron (95% CI, -0.06, 37.7; p?=?0.057), and 62.5% and 56.0% required additional rescue treatment, respectively (95% CI, -25.9, 12.9; p?=?0.52). Other than a similar incidence of procedural pain in the 2 groups, the most common treatment-emergent adverse events, which were generally mild, were headache (14.6% vs 12.0%), constipation (8.3% vs 10.0%), and dizziness (6.3% vs 8.0%), for the palonosetron and ondansetron groups, respectively.Palonosetron and ondansetron did not show differences in the primary efficacy endpoint of CC during the 72 hours after study drug administration. There was a trend toward less emesis in the 0-72 h time period favoring palonosetron. While larger studies are needed to fully assess any clinical benefits of palonosetron to rescue patients who have failed ondansetron prophylaxis for PONV, the benefit, if any, would be limited based on this study.ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00967499 (Registered August 27, 2009).