Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26944693›Full record

Trial reportBMJ open2016

Rationale, design and methodology of a trial evaluating three strategies designed to improve sedation quality in intensive care units (DESIST study).

Timothy S Walsh, Kalliopi Kydonaki, Jean Antonelli, Jacqueline Stephen, Robert J Lee, Kirsty Everingham, Janet Hanley, Kimmo Uutelo, Petra Peltola, Christopher J Weir and 1 more

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

Trial report in BMJ open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01634451 (Development and Evaluation of Strategies to Improve Sedation Quality in InTensive Care), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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.

NCT01634451 nacompletednot on this map

Development and Evaluation of Strategies to Improve Sedation Quality in InTensive Care

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of EdinburghRan2012 to 2014Enrolled1,637ConditionsCritical IllnessArmsBespoke on-line sedation education package, Sedation specific outcome process feedback, Responsiveness monitoring, novel sedation monitor
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Frightening and Traumatic Memories Early after Intensive Care Discharge.American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2019
    Article
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

11 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Timothy S WalshAnaesthetics, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Kalliopi KydonakiAnaesthetics, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Jean AntonelliEdinburgh Clinical Trials Unit, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Jacqueline StephenEdinburgh Clinical Trials Unit, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Robert J LeeCentre for Population Health Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Kirsty EveringhamAnaesthetics, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Janet HanleyEdinburgh Health Services Research Unit, Edinburgh, UK.
Kimmo UuteloGE Healthcare Finland Oy, Helsinki, Finland.
Petra PeltolaGE Healthcare Finland Oy, Helsinki, Finland.
Christopher J WeirCentre for Population Health Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK Edinburgh Health Services Research Unit, Edinburgh, UK.
Development and Evaluation of Strategies to Improve Sedation practice in in Tensive care Study Investigators
University of Edinburgh · GBGeneral Electric (Finland) · FI

Funding

Chief Scientist Office CZH/3/3
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo describe the rationale, design and methodology for a trial of three novel interventions developed to improve sedation-analgesia quality in adult intensive care units (ICUs). PARTICIPANTS AND

setting8 clusters, each a Scottish ICU. All mechanically ventilated sedated patients were potentially eligible for inclusion in data analysis.

designCluster randomised design in 8 ICUs, with ICUs randomised after 45 weeks baseline data collection to implement one of four intervention combinations: a web-based educational programme (2 ICUs); education plus regular sedation quality feedback using process control charts (2 ICUs); education plus a novel sedation monitoring technology (2 ICUs); or all three interventions. ICUs measured sedation-analgesia quality, relevant drug use and clinical outcomes, during a 45-week preintervention and 45-week postintervention period separated by an 8-week implementation period. The intended sample size was >100 patients per site per study period.

main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was the proportion of 12 h care periods with optimum sedation-analgesia, defined as the absence of agitation, unnecessary deep sedation, poor relaxation and poor ventilator synchronisation. Secondary outcomes were proportions of care periods with each of these four components of optimum sedation and rates of sedation-related adverse events. Sedative and analgesic drug use, and ICU and hospital outcomes were also measured. ANALYTIC APPROACH: Multilevel generalised linear regression mixed models will explore the effects of each intervention taking clustering into account, and adjusting for age, gender and APACHE II score. Sedation-analgesia quality outcomes will be explored at ICU level and individual patient level. A process evaluation using mixed methods including quantitative description of intervention implementation, focus groups and direct observation will provide explanatory information regarding any effects observed.

conclusionsThe DESIST study uses a novel design to provide system-level evaluation of three contrasting complex interventions on sedation-analgesia quality. Recruitment is complete and analysis ongoing. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01634451.

Indexed as

Intensive Care UnitsAnalgesiaCluster AnalysisCritical CareFemaleHumansHypnotics and SedativesMaleMonitoring, PhysiologicProcess Assessment, Health CareQuality ImprovementRespiration, ArtificialScotlandHypnotics and Sedativesclinical trialPAIN MANAGEMENTquality improvementsedation

Identifiers

PMID26944693
PMCPMC4785300
OpenAlexW2313283901

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.