Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 6 de 6
Filtrar
2.
Crit Care Explor ; 4(12): e0808, 2022 Dec.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36506834

RESUMO

Proliferation of COVID-19 research underscored the need for improved awareness among investigators, research staff and bedside clinicians of the operational details of clinical studies. The objective was to describe the genesis, goals, participation, procedures, and outcomes of two research operations committees in an academic ICU during the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN: Two-phase, single-center multistudy cohort. SETTING: University-affiliated ICU in Hamilton, ON, Canada. PATIENTS: Adult patients in the ICU, medical stepdown unit, or COVID-19 ward. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: An interprofessional COVID Collaborative was convened at the pandemic onset within our department, to proactively coordinate studies, help navigate multiple authentic consent encounters by different research staff, and determine which studies would be suitable for coenrollment. From March 2020 to May 2021, five non-COVID trials continued, two were paused then restarted, and five were launched. Over 15 months, 161 patients were involved in 215 trial enrollments, 110 (51.1%) of which were into a COVID treatment trial. The overall informed consent rate (proportion agreed of those eligible and approached including a priori and deferred consent models) was 83% (215/259). The informed consent rate was lower for COVID-19 trials (110/142, 77.5%) than other trials (105/117, 89.7%; p = 0.01). Patients with COVID-19 were significantly more likely to be coenrolled in two or more studies (29/77, 37.7%) compared with other patients (13/84, 15.5%; p = 0.002). Review items for each new study were collated, refined, and evolved into a modifiable checklist template to set up each study for success. The COVID Collaborative expanded to a more formal Department of Critical Care Research Operations Committee in June 2021, supporting sustainable research operations during and beyond the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: Structured coordination and increased communication about research operations among diverse research stakeholders cultivated a sense of shared purpose and enhanced the integrity of clinical research operations.

3.
JAMA ; 327(21): 2104-2113, 2022 06 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35569448

RESUMO

Importance: The efficacy and safety of prone positioning is unclear in nonintubated patients with acute hypoxemia and COVID-19. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and adverse events of prone positioning in nonintubated adult patients with acute hypoxemia and COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: Pragmatic, unblinded randomized clinical trial conducted at 21 hospitals in Canada, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and the US. Eligible adult patients with COVID-19 were not intubated and required oxygen (≥40%) or noninvasive ventilation. A total of 400 patients were enrolled between May 19, 2020, and May 18, 2021, and final follow-up was completed in July 2021. Intervention: Patients were randomized to awake prone positioning (n = 205) or usual care without prone positioning (control; n = 195). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was endotracheal intubation within 30 days of randomization. The secondary outcomes included mortality at 60 days, days free from invasive mechanical ventilation or noninvasive ventilation at 30 days, days free from the intensive care unit or hospital at 60 days, adverse events, and serious adverse events. Results: Among the 400 patients who were randomized (mean age, 57.6 years [SD, 12.83 years]; 117 [29.3%] were women), all (100%) completed the trial. In the first 4 days after randomization, the median duration of prone positioning was 4.8 h/d (IQR, 1.8 to 8.0 h/d) in the awake prone positioning group vs 0 h/d (IQR, 0 to 0 h/d) in the control group. By day 30, 70 of 205 patients (34.1%) in the prone positioning group were intubated vs 79 of 195 patients (40.5%) in the control group (hazard ratio, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.59 to 1.12], P = .20; absolute difference, -6.37% [95% CI, -15.83% to 3.10%]). Prone positioning did not significantly reduce mortality at 60 days (hazard ratio, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.62 to 1.40], P = .54; absolute difference, -1.15% [95% CI, -9.40% to 7.10%]) and had no significant effect on days free from invasive mechanical ventilation or noninvasive ventilation at 30 days or on days free from the intensive care unit or hospital at 60 days. There were no serious adverse events in either group. In the awake prone positioning group, 21 patients (10%) experienced adverse events and the most frequently reported were musculoskeletal pain or discomfort from prone positioning (13 of 205 patients [6.34%]) and desaturation (2 of 205 patients [0.98%]). There were no reported adverse events in the control group. Conclusions and Relevance: In patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure from COVID-19, prone positioning, compared with usual care without prone positioning, did not significantly reduce endotracheal intubation at 30 days. However, the effect size for the primary study outcome was imprecise and does not exclude a clinically important benefit. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04350723.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Intubação Intratraqueal , Decúbito Ventral , Insuficiência Respiratória , Vigília , Adulto , Idoso , COVID-19/complicações , COVID-19/terapia , Feminino , Humanos , Hipóxia/etiologia , Hipóxia/terapia , Intubação Intratraqueal/métodos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Respiração Artificial/métodos , Síndrome do Desconforto Respiratório/etiologia , Síndrome do Desconforto Respiratório/terapia , Insuficiência Respiratória/etiologia , Insuficiência Respiratória/terapia
4.
Ann Am Thorac Soc ; 19(2): 238-244, 2022 02.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34242140

RESUMO

Rationale: Laryngeal edema is a known complication of endotracheal intubation that may cause airway obstruction upon extubation. The only test available to predict this complication is the cuff leak test (CLT). Objectives: Given the uncertainty of the CLT's clinical utility, we conducted the COMIC (Cuff Leak Test and Airway Obstruction in Mechanically Ventilated ICU Patients) pilot study to examine the feasibility of undertaking a larger trial. Methods: COMIC is a multicentered, parallel-group randomized trial performed in Canada, Saudi Arabia, and Poland. We enrolled mechanically ventilated adults admitted to the intensive care unit who were deemed ready for extubation. Those allocated to the intervention arm had the results of their CLT communicated to the healthcare team, who then decided to proceed with extubation or not. In those randomized to the control arm, the CLT results were not communicated to the healthcare team and patients were extubated, regardless of the CLT result. The primary outcomes focused on feasibility. Results: One hundred patients (56 in the intervention and 44 in the control arm) were enrolled. All feasibility criteria were met, including 1) recruitment rate of 7.6 patients/month, 2) consent rate of 88.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 82.1-94.5%), and 3) protocol adherence of 98% (95% CI, 95-100%). There were two episodes of clinically significant stridor in the intervention group and four patients who required reintubation in each group. Conclusions: The results of the COMIC pilot trial support the feasibility of a larger trial to determine the effect of the CLT on reintubation and clinically important stridor.Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03372707).


Assuntos
Obstrução das Vias Respiratórias , Respiração Artificial , Adulto , Extubação/efeitos adversos , Extubação/métodos , Obstrução das Vias Respiratórias/diagnóstico , Obstrução das Vias Respiratórias/etiologia , Obstrução das Vias Respiratórias/terapia , Humanos , Unidades de Terapia Intensiva , Intubação Intratraqueal/efeitos adversos , Projetos Piloto , Estudos Prospectivos , Respiração Artificial/efeitos adversos
5.
BMJ Open ; 9(7): e029394, 2019 07 19.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31326936

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Endotracheal intubation and invasive mechanical ventilation are lifesaving interventions that are commonly performed in the intensive care unit (ICU). Laryngeal oedema is a known complication of intubation that may cause airway obstruction in a patient on extubation. To date, the only test available to predict this complication is the cuff leak test (CLT); however, its diagnostic accuracy and utility remains uncertain. Herein, we report the protocol for the CuffLeak and AirwayObstruction in MechanicallyVentilated ICU Patients (COMIC) pilottrial. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This will be a multicentred, pragmatic, pilot randomised controlled trial (RCT). We will enrol 100 mechanically ventilated patients in the ICU who are deemed ready for extubation. We will exclude patients at a high risk of laryngeal oedema. All enrolled patients will have a CLT done before extubation. In the intervention arm, the results of the CLT will be communicated to the bedside physician, and decision to extubate will be left to the treating team. In the control arm, respiratory therapist will not communicate the results of the CLT to the treating physician, and the patient will be extubated regardless of the CLT result. Randomisation will be done in a 1:1 allocation ratio, stratified by size of the endotracheal tube and duration of invasive mechanical ventilation.Although we will examine all clinical outcomes relevant for the future COMIC RCT, the primary outcomes of the COMIC pilottrial will be feasibility outcomes including: consent rate, recruitment rate and protocol adherence. Clinical outcomes include postextubation stridor, reintubation, emergency surgical airway, ICU mortality, in hospital mortality, duration of mechanical ventilation and ICU length of stay in days. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The Hamilton Integrated Research Ethics Board, Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University Institutional Review Board and Bioethical Commission of the Jagiellonian University approved this study. The trial results will be disseminated via publication in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03372707.


Assuntos
Obstrução das Vias Respiratórias/diagnóstico , Obstrução das Vias Respiratórias/etiologia , Técnicas de Diagnóstico do Sistema Respiratório , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto/métodos , Respiração Artificial/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Unidades de Terapia Intensiva , Projetos Piloto
6.
Indian J Orthop ; 45(2): 106-7, 2011 Mar.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21430863
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA