Trial reportPloS one2009
Effects of neuraxial blockade may be difficult to study using large randomized controlled trials: the PeriOperative Epidural Trial (POET) Pilot Study.
Trial report in PloS one, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Epidural analgesia for adults undergoing cardiac surgery with or without cardiopulmonary bypass.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Feasibility Study for a Randomized Controlled Trial of Aromatherapy Footbath for Stimulating Onset of Labor in Term Pregnant Women.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Trial
- Trial
- Trial
- A randomized feasibility trial of clonidine to reduce perioperative cardiac risk in patients on chronic beta-blockade: the EPIC study.Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie · 2014Trial
- Feasibility of conducting a military-relevant multicenter cohort study to assess outcomes of early trauma resuscitative interventions in a prolonged care civilian setting.The journal of trauma and acute care surgery · 2023Article
- Ultra-minimally Invasive Sonographically-guided Trigger Digit Release: An External Pilot Study.Oman medical journal · 2022Article
- Major neurological complications following central neuraxial blockade - A multicentre pilot study in Aurangabad city (MGMA CNB Study).Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2021Article
- Article
- A tutorial on pilot studies: the what, why and how.BMC medical research methodology · 2010 · on this mapArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEarly randomized controlled trials have suggested that neuraxial blockade may reduce cardiorespiratory complications after non-cardiothoracic surgery, but recent larger trials have been inconclusive. We conducted a pilot study to assess the feasibility of conducting a large multicentre randomized controlled trial in Canada. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL
findingsAfter Research Ethics Board approvals from the participating institutions, subjects were recruited if they were > or = 45 years old, had an expected hospital stay > or = 48 hours, were undergoing a noncardiothoracic procedure amenable to epidural analgesia, met one of six risk criteria, and did not have contraindications to neuraxial blockade. After informed consent, subjects were randomly allocated to combined epidural analgesia (epidural group) and neuraxial anesthesia, with or without general anesthesia, or intravenous opioid analgesia (IV group) and general anesthesia. The primary outcomes were the rate of recruitment and the percents of eligible patients recruited, crossed over, and followed completely. Feasibility targets were defined a priori. A blinded, independent committee adjudicated the secondary clinical outcomes. Subjects were followed daily while in hospital and then at 30 days after surgery. Analysis was intention-to-treat. Over a 15-month period, the recruitment rate was 0.5+/-0.3 (mean+/-SEM) subjects per week per centre; 112/494 (22.7%) eligible subjects were recruited at four tertiary-care teaching hospitals in Canada. Thirteen (26.5%) of 49 subjects in the epidural group crossed over to the IV group; seven (14.3%) were due to failed or inadequate analgesia or complications from epidural analgesia. Five (9.8%) of 51 subjects in the IV group crossed over to the epidural group but none were due to inadequate analgesia or complications. Ninety-eight (97.0%) of 101 subjects were successfully followed up until 30 days after their surgery. CONCLUSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Of the criteria we defined for the feasibility of a full-scale trial, only the follow-up target was met. The other feasibility outcomes did not meet our preset criteria for success. The results suggest that a large multicentre trial may not be a feasible design to study the perioperative effects of neuraxial blockade.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT 0221260 Controlled-Trials.com ISRCTN 35629817.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.