Long-term postoperative quality of sleep after fentanyl- and remifentanil-based anaesthesia - a randomised controlled trial

2012 ◽  
Vol 29 ◽  
pp. 28-29
Author(s):  
D. M. Pöpping ◽  
G. Chapman ◽  
H. Grenda ◽  
T. Ledowski ◽  
M. Wenk
Keyword(s):  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Quality Of Sleep ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
Postoperative Quality

scholarly journals Effects of training on quality of peer review: randomised controlled trial

BMJ ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 328 (7441) ◽  
pp. 673 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara Schroter ◽  
Nick Black ◽  
Stephen Evans ◽  
James Carpenter ◽  
Fiona Godlee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Group Score ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
Quality Instrument

AbstractObjective To determine the effects of training on the quality of peer review.Design Single blind randomised controlled trial with two intervention groups receiving different types of training plus a control group.Setting and participants Reviewers at a general medical journal.Interventions Attendance at a training workshop or reception of a self taught training package focusing on what editors want from reviewers and how to critically appraise randomised controlled trials.Main outcome measures Quality of reviews of three manuscripts sent to reviewers at four to six monthly intervals, evaluated using the validated review quality instrument; number of deliberate major errors identified; time taken to review the manuscripts; proportion recommending rejection of the manuscripts.Results Reviewers in the self taught group scored higher in review quality after training than did the control group (score 2.85 v 2.56; difference 0.29, 95% confidence interval 0.14 to 0.44; P = 0.001), but the difference was not of editorial significance and was not maintained in the long term. Both intervention groups identified significantly more major errors after training than did the control group (3.14 and 2.96 v 2.13; P < 0.001), and this remained significant after the reviewers' performance at baseline assessment was taken into account. The evidence for benefit of training was no longer apparent on further testing six months after the interventions. Training had no impact on the time taken to review the papers but was associated with an increased likelihood of recommending rejection (92% and 84% v 76%; P = 0.002).Conclusions Short training packages have only a slight impact on the quality of peer review. The value of longer interventions needs to be assessed.

scholarly journals Effect of dexamethasone in patients with ARDS and COVID-19 – prospective, multi-centre, open-label, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial (REMED trial): A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan Maláska ◽  
Jan Stašek ◽  
František Duška ◽  
Martin Balík ◽  
Jan Máca ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Parallel Group ◽  
Secondary Objective ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Abstract ObjectivesThe primary objective of this study is to test the hypothesis that administration of dexamethasone 20 mg is superior to a 6 mg dose in adult patients with moderate or severe ARDS due to confirmed COVID-19. The secondary objective is to investigate the efficacy and safety of dexamethasone 20 mg versus dexamethasone 6 mg. The exploratory objective of this study is to assess long-term consequences on mortality and quality of life at 180 and 360 days.

scholarly journals Effectiveness of the ABCDEF bundle on delirium, functional outcomes and quality of life in intensive care patients: a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial with embedded process evaluation

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (7) ◽  
pp. e044814
Author(s):  
Kellie Sosnowski ◽  
Marion Mitchell ◽  
Marie Cooke ◽  
Hayden White ◽  
Lynette Morrison ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Process Evaluation ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Study Results ◽  
Abcdef Bundle ◽  
Randomised Controlled

IntroductionHospital mortality for critically ill patients has decreased significantly throughout the developed world over the past two decades, attributable to improvements in the quality of intensive care, advances in critical care medicine and technologies that provide long-term multiorgan support. However, the long-term outcomes of intensive care unit (ICU) survivors is emerging as a real issue. Cognitive and physical impairments suffered by ICU survivors are common including profound weakness, pain and delirium which are inextricably linked. This study aims to determine the effectiveness of the Assess, prevent and manage pain; Both spontaneous awakening and spontaneous breathing trials; Choice of sedation and analgesia; Delirium: assess, prevent and manage; Early mobility and exercise; Family engagement and empowerment (ABCDEF) bundle in reducing ICU-related short-term and long-term consequences of critical illness through a randomised controlled trial (RCT).Methods and analysisThe study will be a single-centre, prospective RCT. A total of 150 participants will be recruited and randomised to either receive the ABCDEF bundle protocol or non-protocolised standard care for the duration of the participant’s admission in the ICU. The primary outcome is delirium status measured using the Confusion Assessment Measure for ICU (CAM-ICU). Secondary outcomes include physical function measured by the Functional Independence Measure and quality of life measured by the European Quality of Life five dimensions, five-level questionnaire. A mixed-method process evaluation will contribute to understanding the experience of health teams who implement the ABCDEF bundle into practice.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval was provided by the Metro South Health Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC) (EC00167) and the Griffith University’s HREC prior to study commencement.Study results will be disseminated by presentations at conferences and via publications to peer-review journals.Trial registration numberACTRN12620000736943; Pre-results.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document