Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23539110›Full record

Trial reportClinical trials (London, England)2013

IMPROVE trial: a randomized controlled trial of patient-controlled analgesia for sickle cell painful episodes: rationale, design challenges, initial experience, and recommendations for future studies.

Carlton D Dampier, Wally R Smith, Carrie G Wager, Hae-Young Kim, Margaret C Bell, Scott T Miller, Debra L Weiner, Caterina P Minniti, Lakshmanan Krishnamurti, Kenneth I Ataga and 9 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · greenAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Clinical trials (London, England), 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06181695 (Intranasal Sufentanil for Analgesia of Severe Sickle Cell Vaso-occlusive Pain Crisis in the Pediatric Emergency Department), which is not on this map. Cited by 33 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
8.8field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT06181695 phase3not yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Intranasal Sufentanil for Analgesia of Severe Sickle Cell Vaso-occlusive Pain Crisis in the Pediatric Emergency Department: a Double Blind Randomized Versus Placebo Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorAssistance Publique - Hôpitaux de ParisRan2024 to 2027Enrolled182ConditionsVaso-occlusive CrisisArmsSufentanil
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

33 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 59 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Evaluation of Vaso-occlusive Crisis Management With Patient-Controlled Analgesia in Children With Sickle Cell Disease Requiring Hospitalization.The journal of pediatric pharmacology and therapeutics : JPPT : the official journal of PPAG · 2021
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

19 authors at 10 institutions in 1 country.

Carlton D DampierDepartment of Pediatrics, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA. cdampie@emory.edu
Wally R Smith
Carrie G Wager
Hae-Young Kim
Margaret C Bell
Scott T Miller
Debra L Weiner
Caterina P Minniti
Lakshmanan Krishnamurti
Kenneth I Ataga
James R Eckman
Lewis L Hsu
Donna McClish
Sonja M McKinlay
Robert Molokie
Ifeyinwa Osunkwo
Kim Smith-Whitley
Marilyn J Telen
Sickle Cell Disease Clinical Research Network (SCDCRN)
New England Research Institutes · USAflac (United States) · USUniversity of Illinois Chicago · USVirginia Commonwealth University · USChildren's Hospital of Pittsburgh · USDuke Medical Center · USGrady Memorial Hospital · USNational Institutes of Health · USUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · USUniversity of Pennsylvania · US

Funding

Data Coordinating Center for the Sickle Cell Disease Clinical Research NetworkU10HL083721 · NHLBI · NEW ENGLAND RESEARCH INSTITUTES, INC. · PI MCKINLAY, SONJA M · 2006 to 2008
$12.6M
Virginia Comprehensive Sickle Cell Center-Center: Basic & Translational ResearchU54HL090516 · NHLBI · VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY · PI SMITH, WALLY R · 2008 to 2011
$1.4M
Marian Anderson Sickle Cell Center-Sickle Cell Disease Clinical Research NetworkU10HL083705 · NHLBI · DREXEL UNIVERSITY · PI HSU, LEWIS LI-YEN · 2006 to 2008
$509k
NHLBI NIH HHS U10 HL083705NHLBI NIH HHS U10HL083721NHLBI NIH HHS U54 HL090516
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe hallmark of sickle cell disease (SCD) is pain from a vaso-occlusive crisis. Although ambulatory pain accounts for most days in pain, pain is also the most common cause of hospitalization and is typically treated with parenteral opioids. The evidence base is lacking for most analgesic practice in SCD, particularly for the optimal opioid dosing for patient-controlled analgesia (PCA), in part because of the challenges of the trial design and conduct for this rare disease. PURPOSE: The purpose of this report is to describe our Network's experiences with protocol development, implementation, and analysis, including overall study design, the value of pain assessments rather than 'crisis' resolution as trial endpoints, and alternative statistical analysis strategies.

methodsThe Improving Pain Management and Outcomes with Various Strategies (IMPROVE) PCA trial was a multisite inpatient randomized controlled trial comparing two PCA-dosing strategies in adults and children with SCD and acute pain conducted by the SCD Clinical Research Network. The specified primary endpoint was a 25-mm change in a daily average pain intensity using a Visual Analogue Scale, and a number of related pain intensity and pain interference measures were selected as secondary efficacy outcomes. A time-to-event analysis strategy was planned for the primary endpoint.

resultsOf 1116 individuals admitted for pain at 31 participating sites over a 6-month period, 38 were randomized and 4 withdrawn. The trial was closed early due to poor accrual, reflecting a substantial number of challenges encountered during trial implementation. LIMITATIONS: While some of the design issues were unique to SCD or analgesic studies, many of the trial implementation challenges reflected the increasing complexity of conducting clinical trials in the inpatient setting with multiple care providers and evolving electronic medical record systems, particularly in the context of large urban academic medical centers. LESSONS LEARNED: Complicated clinical organization of many sites likely slowed study initiation. More extensive involvement of research staff and site principal investigator in the clinical care operations improved site performance. During the subsequent data analysis, alternative statistical approaches were considered, the results of which should inform future efficacy assessments and increase future trial recruitment success by allowing substantial reductions in target sample size.

conclusionsA complex randomized analgesic trial was initiated within a multisite disease network seeking to provide an evidence base for clinical care. A number of design considerations were shown to be feasible in this setting, and several pain intensity and pain interference measures were shown to be sensitive to time- and treatment-related improvements. While the premature closure and small sample size precluded definitive conclusions regarding treatment efficacy, this trial furnishes a template for design and implementation considerations that should improve future SCD analgesic trials.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAnalgesia, Patient-ControlledAnalgesics, OpioidAnemia, Sickle CellChildHumansMulticenter Studies as TopicPainPain ManagementPain MeasurementRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicResearch DesignAnalgesics, Opioid

Identifiers

PMID23539110
PMCPMC5039779
OpenAlexW2124269654

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

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.