scholarly journals Randomised controlled trial of sugammadex or neostigmine for reversal of neuromuscular block on the incidence of pulmonary complications in older adults undergoing prolonged surgery

2020 ◽  
Vol 124 (5) ◽  
pp. 553-561 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brandon M. Togioka ◽  
David Yanez ◽  
Michael F. Aziz ◽  
Janna R. Higgins ◽  
Praveen Tekkali ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Older Adults ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Neuromuscular Block ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Pulmonary Complications ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
Prolonged Surgery

scholarly journals Prevention of Postoperative Events Following Reversal With Sugammadex or Neostigmine (The P- PERSoN Trial) – Pilot Data Following Early Termination of a Prospective, Blinded, Randomised Trial.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin Luke Olesnicky ◽  
Matthew Doane ◽  
Clare Farrell ◽  
Greg Knoblanche ◽  
Anthony Delaney
Keyword(s):  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Ordinal Data ◽  
Neuromuscular Block ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Randomised Trial ◽  
Pulmonary Complications ◽  
Residual Paralysis ◽  
Postoperative Pulmonary Complications ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Abstract Background: Residual paralysis following anaesthesia is common and can lead to postoperative morbidity. While sugammadex has been shown to be effective in minimising residual paralysis, uncertainty exists as to whether its use reduces any associated morbidity. We designed this trial to determine if the use of sugammadex for the reversal of intraoperative aminosteroid neuromuscular blockade results in improvements in postoperative pulmonary complications, complications in the recovery unit, postoperative nausea and vomiting, and patient satisfaction, when compared to reversal with neostigmine. Methods: A prospective, double-blind, randomised controlled trial in adult patients admitted for surgical operations at two Australian hospitals between December 2018 and March 2019 was performed comparing the reversal of neuromuscular paralysis using sugammadex 2mg/kg versus neostigmine 50mcg/kg. Statistical analysis of continuous data was performed using two tailed t-tests, with categorical and ordinal data was assessed by Chi-squared analysis. Results: The trial was terminated due to a combination of resource constraints and the 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. Of 51 patients screened, 33 were eligible for participation and 30 subsequently recruited and randomised. All patients received the intended treatment allocated. Data for the primary outcome was obtained in all patients. There was no difference in the rates of postoperative pulmonary complications between the sugammadex and neostigmine groups (0% (0/19) vs 9% (1/11) RR 5.0 (95%CI 0.22-113) p=0.37. There was no difference in any of the secondary outcomes between the groups. Conclusions: The P-PERSoN trial showed no difference in post operative pulmonary complications between sugammadex and neostigmine based reversal of aminosteroid neuromuscular block, but was underpowered to show any difference due to early trial termination. The randomisation and data collection was feasible. We support the need for an adequately resourced and funded randomised controlled trial to address this important clinical question. Trial Registration: The P-PERSoN trial is registered at the Australian and New Zealand Trial Registry (www.anzctr.org.au) # ACTRN12616000063415 and The U.S. National Library of Medicine (www.ClinicalTrials.gov) #NCT02825576

scholarly journals Emergency Medicine Palliative Care Access (EMPallA): protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial comparing the effectiveness of specialty outpatient versus nurse-led telephonic palliative care of older adults with advanced illness

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. e025692 ◽  
Author(s):  
Corita R Grudzen ◽  
Deborah J Shim ◽  
Abigail M Schmucker ◽  
Jeanne Cho ◽  
Keith S Goldfeld
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Older Adults ◽  
Palliative Care ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Case Management ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Chronic Obstructive ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
End Stage

IntroductionEmergency department (ED)-initiated palliative care has been shown to improve patient-centred outcomes in older adults with serious, life-limiting illnesses. However, the optimal modality for providing such interventions is unknown. This study aims to compare nurse-led telephonic case management to specialty outpatient palliative care for older adults with serious, life-limiting illness on: (1) quality of life in patients; (2) healthcare utilisation; (3) loneliness and symptom burden and (4) caregiver strain, caregiver quality of life and bereavement.Methods and analysisThis is a protocol for a pragmatic, multicentre, parallel, two-arm randomised controlled trial in ED patients comparing two established models of palliative care: nurse-led telephonic case management and specialty, outpatient palliative care. We will enrol 1350 patients aged 50+ years and 675 of their caregivers across nine EDs. Eligible patients: (1) have advanced cancer (metastatic solid tumour) or end-stage organ failure (New York Heart Association class III or IV heart failure, end-stage renal disease with glomerular filtration rate <15 mL/min/m2, or global initiative for chronic obstructive lung disease stage III, IV or oxygen-dependent chronic obstructive pulmonary disease); (2) speak English; (3) are scheduled for ED discharge or observation status; (4) reside locally; (5) have a working telephone and (6) are insured. Patients will be excluded if they: (1) have dementia; (2) have received hospice care or two or more palliative care visits in the last 6 months or (3) reside in a long-term care facility. We will use patient-level block randomisation, stratified by ED site and disease. Effectiveness will be compared by measuring the impact of each intervention on the specified outcomes. The primary outcome will measure change in patient quality of life.Ethics and disseminationInstitutional Review Board approval was obtained at all study sites. Trial results will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal.Trial registration numberNCT03325985; Pre-results.

scholarly journals Evaluating the provision of Further Enabling Care at Home (FECH+) for informal caregivers of older adults discharged home from hospital: protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. e046600
Author(s):  
Anne-Marie Hill ◽  
Rachael Moorin ◽  
Susan Slatyer ◽  
Christina Bryant ◽  
Keith Hill ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Older Adults ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Informal Caregivers ◽  
Care Recipient ◽  
Care At Home ◽  
Randomised Controlled

IntroductionThere are personal and societal benefits from caregiving; however, caregiving can jeopardise caregivers’ health. The Further Enabling Care at Home (FECH+) programme provides structured nurse support, through telephone outreach, to informal caregivers of older adults following discharge from acute hospital care to home. The trial aims to evaluate the efficacy of the FECH+ programme on caregivers’ health-related quality of life (HRQOL) after care recipients’ hospital discharge.Methods and analysisA multisite, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial with blinded baseline and outcome assessment and intention-to-treat analysis, adhering to Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials guidelines will be conducted. Participants (N=925 dyads) comprising informal home caregiver (18 years or older) and care recipient (70 years or older) will be recruited when the care recipient is discharged from hospital. Caregivers of patients discharged from wards in three hospitals in Australia (one in Western Australia and two in Queensland) are eligible for inclusion. Participants will be randomly assigned to one of the two groups. The intervention group receive the FECH+ programme, which provides structured support and problem-solving for the caregiver after the care recipient’s discharge, in addition to usual care. The control group receives usual care. The programme is delivered by a registered nurse and comprises six 30–45 min telephone support sessions over 6 months. The primary outcome is caregivers’ HRQOL measured using the Assessment of Quality of Life—eight dimensions. Secondary outcomes include caregiver preparedness, strain and distress and use of healthcare services. Changes in HRQOL between groups will be compared using a mixed regression model that accounts for the correlation between repeated measurements.Ethics and disseminationParticipants will provide written informed consent. Ethics approvals have been obtained from Sir Charles Gairdner and Osborne Park Health Care Group, Curtin University, Griffith University, Gold Coast Health Service and government health data linkage services. Findings will be disseminated through presentations, peer-reviewed journals and conferences.Trial registration numberACTRN12620000060943.

scholarly journals Effectiveness of an eHealth self-management tool for older adults with multimorbidity (KeepWell): protocol for a hybrid effectiveness–implementation randomised controlled trial

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. e048350
Author(s):  
Monika Kastner ◽  
Julie Makarski ◽  
Leigh Hayden ◽  
Jemila S Hamid ◽  
Jayna Holroyd-Leduc ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Older Adults ◽  
Chronic Disease ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Disease Management ◽  
Chronic Conditions ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Management Tool ◽  
Self Management ◽  
Plain Language ◽  
Randomised Controlled

IntroductionIn response to the burden of chronic disease among older adults, different chronic disease self-management tools have been created to optimise disease management. However, these seldom consider all aspects of disease management are not usually developed specifically for seniors or created for sustained use and are primarily focused on a single disease. We created an eHealth self-management application called ‘KeepWell’ that supports seniors with complex care needs in their homes. It incorporates the care for two or more chronic conditions from among the most prevalent high-burden chronic diseases.Methods and analysisWe will evaluate the effectiveness, cost and uptake of KeepWell in a 6-month, pragmatic, hybrid effectiveness–implementation randomised controlled trial. Older adults age ≥65 years with one or more chronic conditions who are English speaking are able to consent and have access to a computer or tablet device, internet and an email address will be eligible. All consenting participants will be randomly assigned to KeepWell or control. The allocation sequence will be determined using a random number generator.Primary outcome is perceived self-efficacy at 6 months. Secondary outcomes include quality of life, health background/status, lifestyle (nutrition, physical activity, caffeine, alcohol, smoking and bladder health), social engagement and connections, eHealth literacy; all collected via a Health Risk Questionnaire embedded within KeepWell (intervention) or a survey platform (control). Implementation outcomes will include reach, effectiveness, adoption, fidelity, implementation cost and sustainability.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval has been received from the North York General Hospital Research and Ethics Board. The study is funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and the Ontario Ministry of Health. We will work with our team to develop a dissemination strategy which will include publications, presentations, plain language summaries and an end-of-grant meeting.Trial registration numberNCT04437238.

scholarly journals Stepped care for depression and anxiety in visually impaired older adults: multicentre randomised controlled trial

BMJ ◽  
2015 ◽  
pp. h6127 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hilde P A van der Aa ◽  
Ger H M B van Rens ◽  
Hannie C Comijs ◽  
Tom H Margrain ◽  
Francisca Gallindo-Garre ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Older Adults ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Visually Impaired ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Stepped Care ◽  
Depression And Anxiety ◽  
Randomised Controlled

scholarly journals Bathing adaptations in the homes of older adults (BATH-OUT): results of a feasibility randomised controlled trial (RCT)

2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Phillip J. Whitehead ◽  
Miriam R. Golding-Day ◽  
Stuart Belshaw ◽  
Tony Dawson ◽  
Marilyn James ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Older Adults ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Feasibility Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Randomised Controlled

scholarly journals Better Outcomes for Older people with Spinal Trouble (BOOST) Trial: a randomised controlled trial of a combined physical and psychological intervention for older adults with neurogenic claudication, a protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (10) ◽  
pp. e022205 ◽  
Author(s):  
Esther Williamson ◽  
Lesley Ward ◽  
Karan Vadher ◽  
Susan J Dutton ◽  
Ben Parker ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Older Adults ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Older People ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Psychological Intervention ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Health Economic Evaluation ◽  
Community Dwelling ◽  
Neurogenic Claudication ◽  
Randomised Controlled

IntroductionNeurogenic claudication due to spinal stenosis is common in older adults. The effectiveness of conservative interventions is not known. The aim of the study is to estimate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of a physiotherapist-delivered, combined physical and psychological intervention.Methods and analysisThis is a pragmatic, multicentred, randomised controlled trial. Participants are randomised to a combined physical and psychological intervention (Better Outcomes for Older people with Spinal Trouble (BOOST) programme) or best practice advice (control). Community-dwelling adults, 65 years and over, with neurogenic claudication are identified from community and secondary care services. Recruitment is supplemented using a primary care-based cohort. Participants are registered prospectively and randomised in a 2:1 ratio (intervention:control) using a web-based service to ensure allocation concealment. The target sample size is a minimum of 402. The BOOST programme consists of an individual assessment and twelve 90 min classes, including education and discussion underpinned by cognitive behavioural techniques, exercises and walking circuit. During and after the classes, participants undertake home exercises and there are two support telephone calls to promote adherence with the exercises. Best practice advice is delivered in one to three individual sessions with a physiotherapist. The primary outcome is the Oswestry Disability Index at 12 months. Secondary outcomes include the 6 Minute Walk Test, Short Physical Performance Battery, Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire and Gait Self-Efficacy Scale. Outcomes are measured at 6 and 12 months by researchers who are masked to treatment allocation. The primary statistical analysis will be by ‘intention to treat’. There is a parallel health economic evaluation and qualitative study.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval was given on 3 March 2016 (National Research Ethics Committee number: 16/LO/0349). This protocol adheres to the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials checklist. The results will be reported at conferences and in peer-reviewed publications using the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials guidelines. A plain English summary will be published on the BOOST website.Trial registration numberISRCTN12698674; Pre-results.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document