Trial reportBMJ open2016
Rationale, design and methodology of a trial evaluating three strategies designed to improve sedation quality in intensive care units (DESIST study).
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.
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.
Development and Evaluation of Strategies to Improve Sedation Quality in InTensive Care
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- The POETIC (PrOcess Evaluation of Trials In Critical care) Framework: A Structured Approach for Designing and Conducting Process Evaluations in Critical Care Trials.Critical care explorations · 2025Article
- Blended teaching mode based on small private online course and case-based learning in analgesia and sedation education in China: a comparison with an offline mode.BMC medical education · 2024Article
- Design of Clinical Trials Evaluating Sedation in Critically Ill Adults Undergoing Mechanical Ventilation: Recommendations From Sedation Consortium on Endpoints and Procedures for Treatment, Education, and Research (SCEPTER) Recommendation III.Critical care medicine · 2021Article
- Challenges and barriers to optimising sedation in intensive care: a qualitative study in eight Scottish intensive care units.BMJ open · 2019Article
- Frightening and Traumatic Memories Early after Intensive Care Discharge.American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
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
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.