Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 6 de 6
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
JMIR Med Inform ; 7(4): e14603, 2019 Oct 28.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31661079


BACKGROUND: Research has shown that introducing electronic Health (eHealth) patient monitoring interventions can improve healthcare efficiency and clinical outcomes. The VIGILANCE (VItal siGns monItoring with continuous puLse oximetry And wireless cliNiCian notification aftEr surgery) study was a randomized controlled trial (n=2049) designed to assess the impact of continuous vital sign monitoring with alerts sent to nursing staff when respiratory resuscitations with naloxone, code blues, and intensive care unit transfers occurred in a cohort of postsurgical patients in a ward setting. This report identifies and evaluates key issues and challenges associated with introducing wireless monitoring systems into complex hospital infrastructure during the VIGILANCE eHealth intervention implementation. Potential solutions and suggestions for future implementation research are presented. OBJECTIVE: The goals of this study were to: (1) identify issues related to the deployment of the eHealth intervention system of the VIGILANCE study; and (2) evaluate the influence of these issues on intervention adoption. METHODS: During the VIGILANCE study, issues affecting the implementation of the eHealth intervention were documented on case report forms, alarm event forms, and a nursing user feedback questionnaire. These data were collated by the research and nursing personnel and submitted to the research coordinator. In this evaluation report, the clinical adoption framework was used as a guide to organize the identified issues and evaluate their impact. RESULTS: Using the clinical adoption framework, we identified issues within the framework dimensions of people, organization, and implementation at the meso level, as well as standards and funding issues at the macro level. Key issues included: nursing workflow changes with blank alarm forms (24/1030, 2.33%) and missing alarm forms (236/1030, 22.91%), patient withdrawal (110/1030, 10.68%), wireless network connectivity, false alarms (318/1030, 30.87%), monitor malfunction (36/1030, 3.49%), probe issues (16/1030, 1.55%), and wireless network standards. At the micro level, these issues affected the quality of the service in terms of support provided, the quality of the information yielded by the monitors, and the functionality, reliability, and performance of the monitoring system. As a result, these issues impacted access through the decreased ability of nurses to make complete use of the monitors, impacted care quality of the trial intervention through decreased effectiveness, and impacted productivity through interference in the coordination of care, thus decreasing clinical adoption of the monitoring system. CONCLUSIONS: Patient monitoring with eHealth technology in surgical wards has the potential to improve patient outcomes. However, proper planning that includes engagement of front-line nurses, installation of appropriate wireless network infrastructure, and use of comfortable cableless devices is required to maximize the potential of eHealth monitoring. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02907255;

Contemp Clin Trials Commun ; 7: 81-85, 2017 Sep.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29696172


Background: Sharing masked interim results by the Data Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) with non-DSMB members is an important issue that can affect trial integrity. Our survey's objective is to collect evidence to understand how seemingly masked interim results or result extrapolations are interpreted and discuss whether these results should be shared at interim. Methods: Conducted a 6 scenario-question survey asking trial experts how they interpreted three kinds of seemingly masked interim results or result extrapolation measures (interim combined event rate, adaptive conditional power and "unconditional" conditional power). Results: Thirty-one current Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials group affiliates were invited for survey participation (February 2015). Response rate: 71.0% (22/31). About half, 52.6% (95% CI: 28.9%-74.0%), (10/19), correctly indicated that the interim combined event rate can be interpreted in three ways (drug X doing better than placebo, worse than placebo or the same) if shared at interim. The majority, 72.2% (95% CI: 46.5%-89.7%), (13/18), correctly indicated that the adaptive conditional power suggests relative treatment group effects. The majority, 53.3% (95% CI: 26.6%-77.0%), (8/15), incorrectly indicated that the "unconditional" conditional power suggests relative treatment group effects. Discussion/Conclusion: Knowledge of these three results or result extrapolation measures should not be shared outside of the DSMB at interim as they may mislead or unmask interim results, potentially introducing trial bias. For example, the interim combined event rate can be interpreted in one of three ways potentially leading to mistaken guesswork about interim results. Knowledge of the adaptive conditional power by non-DSMB members is telling of relative treatment effects thus unmasking of interim results.

Clin Invest Med ; 33(6): E375-83, 2010 Dec 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21134339


PURPOSE: Major cardiovascular complications associated with noncardiac surgery represent a substantial population health problem for which there are no established efficacious and safe prophylactic interventions. Acetyl-salicylic acid (ASA) represents a promising intervention. The objective of this study was to determine surgeons' perioperative usage of ASA, and if they would enroll their patients in a perioperative ASA randomized controlled trial (RCT). METHODS: Cross-sectional survey of all practicing Canadian general, orthopedic, and vascular surgeons. Our mailed, self-administered survey asked surgeons to consider only their patients who were at risk of a major perioperative cardiovascular complication. RESULTS: The response rate was 906/1854 (49%). For patients taking ASA chronically, there was marked variability regarding ASA continuation prior to surgery amongst the general and orthopedic surgeons, whereas 76% of vascular surgeons continued ASA in 81-100% of their patients. For patients not taking ASA chronically, approaches to starting ASA prior to surgery were variable amongst the vascular surgeons, whereas 70% of general and 82% of orthopaedic surgeons did not start ASA. For patients taking ASA chronically, 73% of general surgeons, 70% of orthopaedic surgeons, and 36% of vascular surgeons would allow at least 40% of their patients to participate in a perioperative RCT comparing stopping versus continuing ASA. For patients not taking ASA chronically, most general (76%), orthopaedic (67%), and vascular (51%) surgeons would allow at least 40% of their patients to participate in a perioperative RCT comparing starting ASA versus placebo. CONCLUSION: This national survey demonstrates that perioperative ASA usage as reported by surgeons is variable, identifying the need for, and community interest in, a large perioperative ASA trial.

Aspirina/uso terapêutico , Médicos/psicologia , Médicos/estatística & dados numéricos , Canadá , Estudos Transversais , Humanos , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto
Clin Ther ; 32(5): 844-60, 2010 May.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-20685494


BACKGROUND: Buprenorphine is a mixed-activity, partial mu-opioid agonist. Its lipid solubility makes it well suited for transdermal administration. OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the efficacy and safety profile of a 7-day buprenorphine transdermal system (BTDS) in adult (age >18 years) patients with moderate to severe chronic low back pain previously treated with > or =1 tablet daily of an opioid analgesic. METHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover study, followed by an open-label extension phase. After a 2- to 7-day washout of previous opioid therapy, eligible patients were randomized to receive BTDS 10 microg/h or matching placebo patches. The dose was titrated weekly using 10- and 20-microg/h patches (maximum, 40 microg/h) based on efficacy and tolerability. After 4 weeks, patients crossed over to the alternative treatment for another 4 weeks. Patients who completed the double-blind study were eligible to enter the 6-month open-label phase. Rescue analgesia was provided as acetaminophen 325 mg to be taken as 1 or 2 tablets every 4 to 6 hours as needed. The primary outcome assessments were daily pain intensity, measured on a 100-mm visual analog scale (VAS), from no pain to excruciating pain, and a 5-point ordinal scale, from 0 = none to 4 = excruciating. Secondary outcome assessments included the Pain and Sleep Questionnaire (100-mm VAS, from never to always), Pain Disability Index (ordinal scale, from 0 = no disability to 11 = total disability), Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale (categorical scale, from 0 = no difficulty to 5 = unable to do), and the 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36). Patients and investigators assessed overall treatment effectiveness at the end of each phase; they assessed treatment preference at the end of double-blind treatment. After implementation of a precautionary amendment, the QTc interval was measured 3 to 4 days after randomization and after any dose adjustment. All assessments performed during the double-blind phase were also performed every 2 months during the open-label extension. Adverse events were collected by non-directed questioning throughout the study. RESULTS: Of 78 randomized patients, 52 (66.7%) completed at least 2 consecutive weeks of treatment in each study phase without major protocol violations (per-protocol [PP] population: 32 women, 20 men; mean [SD] age, 51.3 [11.4] years; mean weight, 85.5 [19.5] kg; 94% white, 4% black, 2% other). The mean (SD) dose of study medication during the last week of treatment was 29.8 (12.1) microg/h for BTDS and 32.9 (10.7) microg/h for placebo (P = NS). During the last week of treatment, BTDS was associated with significantly lower mean (SD) pain intensity scores compared with placebo on both the VAS (45.3 [21.3] vs 53.1 [24.3] mm, respectively; P = 0.022) and the 5-point ordinal scale (1.9 [0.7] vs 2.2 [0.8]; P = 0.044). The overall Pain and Sleep score was significantly lower with BTDS than with placebo (177.6 [125.5] vs 232.9 [131.9]; P = 0.027). There were no treatment differences on the Pain Disability Index, Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale, or SF-36; however, BTDS was associated with significant improvements compared with placebo on 2 individual Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale items (get out of bed: P = 0.042; sit in a chair for several hours: P = 0.022). Of the 48 patients/physicians in the PP population who rated the effectiveness of treatment, 64.6% of patients (n = 31) rated BTDS moderately or highly effective, as did 62.5% of investigators (n = 30). Among the 50 patients in the PP population who answered the preference question, 66.0% of patients (n = 33) preferred the phase in which they received BTDS and 24.0% (n = 12) preferred the phase in which they received placebo (P = 0.001), with the remainder having no preference; among investigators, 60.0% (n = 30) and 28.0% (n = 14) preferred the BTDS and placebo phases, respectively (P = 0.008), with the remainder having no preference. The mean placebo-adjusted change from baseline in the QTc interval ranged from -0.8 to +3.8 milliseconds (P = NS). BTDS treatment was associated with a significantly higher frequency of nausea (P < 0.001), dizziness (P < 0.001), vomiting (P = 0.008), somnolence (P = 0.020), and dry mouth (P = 0.003), but not constipation. Of the 49 patients completing 8 weeks of double-blind treatment, 40 (81.6%) entered the 6-month, open-label extension study and 27 completed it. Improvements in pain scores achieved during the double-blind phase were maintained in these patients. CONCLUSIONS: In the 8-week, double-blind portion of this study, BTDS 10 to 40 microg/h was effective compared with placebo in the management of chronic, moderate to severe low back pain in patients who had previously received opioids. The improvements in pain scores were sustained throughout the 6-month, open-label extension. (Current Controlled Trials identification number: ISRCTN 06013881).

Analgésicos Opioides/administração & dosagem , Buprenorfina/administração & dosagem , Dor Lombar/tratamento farmacológico , Administração Cutânea , Adulto , Idoso , Buprenorfina/efeitos adversos , Doença Crônica , Estudos Cross-Over , Método Duplo-Cego , Eletrocardiografia/efeitos dos fármacos , Feminino , Humanos , Dor Lombar/fisiopatologia , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade
J Surg Res ; 157(2): 161-7, 2009 Dec.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-19520387


BACKGROUND: Circulating interleukin-6 (IL-6) is frequently used to study surgical injury and inflammation. Measurement properties of serum IL-6 were examined following lumbar decompression surgery (LDS), including time course, sensitivity, and validity for detecting muscle trauma in comparison to the muscle cytoplasmic protein creatine kinase (CK). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seven women and seven men had serial blood samples taken in the preoperative waiting areas, immediately after surgery, at 6, 12, 24, 48 h, 4 d, and at 6 to 7 d. Lumbar surgeries were single level, decompression, with laminotomy. RESULTS: Time to peak serum IL-6 varied across individuals (range 6 to 48 h). However, the higher of two samples drawn within the sensitive time window (6 to 24 h) had a strong correlation with peak IL-6 (r = 0.99, P < 0.001). There was a moderate correlation between the rise in serum IL-6 and rise in serum CK, r = 0.56, P < 0.05. T-tests revealed that group mean IL-6 was significantly elevated at only one serial time point (6 h), whereas group mean CK was significantly elevated at three serial time points (6, 12, 24 h) and approached significant elevation as late as 48 h (P = 0.07). Women had lower CK concentrations at 6 and 24 h but gender differences on IL-6 were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: The serum IL-6 response to LDS injury can be captured in a practical manner, despite individual variability in time course. Inclusion of CK measurement may improve sensitivity to the muscle trauma component of an overall injury.

Descompressão Cirúrgica/efeitos adversos , Interleucina-6/sangue , Vértebras Lombares/cirurgia , Músculo Esquelético/lesões , Adulto , Idoso , Biomarcadores/sangue , Creatina Quinase/sangue , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Músculo Esquelético/metabolismo , Estudos Retrospectivos , Fatores de Tempo