Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36418131›Full record

Trial reportBMJ open2022

Clinically assisted hydration in patients in the last days of life ('CHELsea II' trial): a cluster randomised trial.

Andrew Davies, Melanie Waghorn, Megan Roberts, Heather Gage, Simon S Skene

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) expert opinion/guidance on the use of clinically assisted hydration in patients with advanced cancer.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024
    Guideline
  3. Clinical features of audible upper airway secretions ("death rattle") in patients with cancer in the last days of life.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024
    Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Andrew DaviesTrinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland andavies@tcd.ie.ORCID 0000-0003-4207-4799
Melanie WaghornSurrey Clinical Trials Unit, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK.
Megan RobertsSurrey Clinical Trials Unit, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK.
Heather GageSchool of Economics, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK.
Simon S SkeneSurrey Clinical Trials Unit, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7828-3122
University of Surrey · GBUniversity College Dublin · IE

Funding

Department of Health
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionProvision of clinically assisted hydration (CAH) at the end of life is one of the most contentious issues in medicine. The aim of the 'CHELsea II' trial is to evaluate CAH in patients in the last days of life. The objectives are to assess the effect of CAH on delirium, audible upper airway secretions, pain and other symptoms, and overall survival, as well as the tolerability of CAH, and the health economic impact. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The study is a cluster randomised trial, involving 80 sites/clusters (mainly hospices) and 1600 patients. Sites will be randomised to an intervention, and this will become the standard of care during the trial. Intervention 'A' involves continuance of drinking (if appropriate), mouth care and usual end-of-life care. Intervention 'B' involves continuance of drinking, mouth care, usual end-of-life care and CAH, that is, parenteral fluids. The fluid may be given intravenously or subcutaneously, the type will be dextrose saline (4% dextrose, 0.18% sodium chloride) and the volume will be dependent on weight.Participants will be assessed every 4 hours by the clinical team. The primary endpoint is the proportion of participants who develop delirium determined using the Nursing Delirium Screening Scale (using a cut-off score of ≥2). A mixed-effects logistic regression will be used to assess the difference in the odds of developing delirium between the interventions. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical committee approval has been granted by the Brighton and Sussex Research Ethics Committee (REC) (main REC for the UK: reference-IRAS 313640), and by the Scotland A REC (REC for adults with incapacity in Scotland: reference-22/SS/0053-IRAS-317637). The consent process follows the Mental Capacity Act: if the patient has capacity, then consent will be sought in the normal way; if the patient does not have capacity, then a personal/nominated consultee will be approached for advice about the patient entering the study. The consent process is slightly different in Scotland.The results of the trial will be published in general medical/palliative care journals, and presented at general medical/palliative care conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN65858561.

Indexed as

DeliriumHospice and Palliative Care NursingTerminal CareAdultGlucoseHumansPalliative CareGlucoseAdult palliative careINTERNAL MEDICINEONCOLOGY

Identifiers

PMID36418131
PMCPMC9684991
OpenAlexW4309822071

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.