search
Back to results

vHDU Phase 5: Impact of an Ambulatory Monitoring System on Deterioration Detection and Clinical Outcomes (vHDU phase 5)

Primary Purpose

Surgery, Deterioration, Clinical

Status
Recruiting
Phase
Not Applicable
Locations
United Kingdom
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
Ambulatory monitoring system
Active alerting system
Sponsored by
University of Oxford
About
Eligibility
Locations
Arms
Outcomes
Full info

About this trial

This is an interventional diagnostic trial for Surgery focused on measuring wearables, clinical monitoring, vital signs

Eligibility Criteria

18 Years - undefined (Adult, Older Adult)All SexesDoes not accept healthy volunteers

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Patient stable for at least 6 hours with at least one of the following:

    • NEWS2 <= 2 and (in some exceptional NEWS >2 confirmed with clinical staff, eg. patients with comorbidities).
    • Frequency of observations of >4 hours at the time of randomisation.
  • Participant is willing and able to give informed consent for participation in the trial.
  • Male or Female, aged 18 years or above.
  • Any patient admitted to the participating surgical unit (including post-ICU patients) who are not currently monitored with standard continuous monitoring

Exclusion Criteria:

  • The participant may not enter the trial if ANY of the following apply:

    • Intra-cardiac device
    • Monitored for less than 24 hours

Sites / Locations

  • Oxford University Hospitals TrustRecruiting

Arms of the Study

Arm 1

Arm 2

Arm Type

Experimental

Active Comparator

Arm Label

AMS group

Standard Care group

Arm Description

Patients randomised to the intervention group will receive the AMS; this will be connected to the dashboard and the alerting system. Clinical staff will have access to the dashboard and alerted accordingly for the assigned patients.

Patients in the control group will also receive the AMS however this will not be connected to the ward dashboard and clinical staff will not be able to access these patient's continuous vital signs: Patient will not appear on the ward dashboard No alerting system will be given to staff

Outcomes

Primary Outcome Measures

Time from first period of unexpected physiological instability to set of observations
To assess the impact of AMS integration (with active clinical alerts) versus standard care in deterioration detection

Secondary Outcome Measures

Frequency of periods of physiological instability.
To assess the impact of AMS integration (with active clinical alerts) versus standard care on instability episodes.
Frequency of unscheduled interventions
Frequency of unscheduled interventions. The investigators will collect time and frequency To assess the impact of AMS integration (with active clinical alerts) versus standard care on unscheduled interventions. to/of unscheduled interventions (as defined in the above intervention examples) in both groups. This will be collected through completion of the relevant CRF/spreadsheet, collecting the following information: - Unscheduled interventions examples (not limited to these): Antibiotics Acute changes to therapy/medication (e.g. drugs to treat cardiac arrhythmia) Supplementary oxygen Fluids Radiological intervention (x-ray, CT, etc.) Chest physiotherapy
ICU admission rate
To assess the impact of AMS integration (with active clinical alerts) versus standard care other deterioration related outcomes.
Adverse event/complication rate
To assess the impact of AMS integration (with active clinical alerts) versus standard care other deterioration related outcomes. The investigators will collect all complication and adverse event in both groups. This will be categorised according to the Clavien-Dindo classification.
Cardiac arrest team call frequency
To assess the impact of AMS integration (with active clinical alerts) versus standard care other deterioration related outcomes. Other deterioration detection outcomes include cardiac arrest team activation where the investigators will collect cardiac arrest team calls and compare in both groups.
Time difference between deterioration detection by nurse and AMS (control group only).
To assess the potential impact of AMS integration in deterioration detection of the control group Time difference between deterioration detection by nurse and AMS. As participants in the control group will also be wearing these devices the investigators aim to assess the time difference (in minutes) between the first unexpected deterioration occurred (as defined above) and clinical staff detected it. The investigators will also explore time difference to intervention and related clinical outcomes.

Full Information

First Posted
October 12, 2021
Last Updated
January 5, 2023
Sponsor
University of Oxford
Collaborators
National Institute for Health Research, United Kingdom
search

1. Study Identification

Unique Protocol Identification Number
NCT05118477
Brief Title
vHDU Phase 5: Impact of an Ambulatory Monitoring System on Deterioration Detection and Clinical Outcomes
Acronym
vHDU phase 5
Official Title
The Virtual High Dependency Unit (vHDU) Project Phase 5: Impact of an Ambulatory Monitoring System on Deterioration Detection and Clinical Outcomes. A Feasibility Randomised Controlled Trial
Study Type
Interventional

2. Study Status

Record Verification Date
January 2023
Overall Recruitment Status
Recruiting
Study Start Date
July 28, 2022 (Actual)
Primary Completion Date
November 30, 2023 (Anticipated)
Study Completion Date
November 30, 2023 (Anticipated)

3. Sponsor/Collaborators

Responsible Party, by Official Title
Sponsor
Name of the Sponsor
University of Oxford
Collaborators
National Institute for Health Research, United Kingdom

4. Oversight

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Drug Product
No
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Device Product
No
Data Monitoring Committee
No

5. Study Description

Brief Summary
Sometimes in hospital, it is not noticed that patients are becoming unwell quickly enough. This may mean that they are less likely to survive than if the worsening of their illness had been picked up sooner. One reason for this may be that hospital staff are unable to check patients' vital signs (such as breathing rate, heart rate and level of oxygen in their blood) frequently enough to help them decide if a patient is becoming more unwell. Currently, for nurses to watch these vital signs closely, patients are either attached to a static machine by the patient's bedside using wires, or staff visit the patient every few hours to measure these vital signs using a portable wired machine. It is now possible to closely monitor patients using small devices which attach to the wrist, finger or chest. These devices allow nursing staff to continually watch vital signs data from these patients when they are away from their bedside. These machines are also wireless and portable, so they do not stop patients moving around, which is important for recovery, and are comfortable to wear. In past years, the investigators have tested these devices and developed a system to allow the clinical staff to see the continuous vital signs. In this final stage of the project, the investigators will test this system (with the selected devices) on patients in hospital. The investigators will start by doing a small trial on one surgical ward, and asking for staff and patient feedback of how the system worked, how useful it was, and how easy to use. If the feedback from this first small trial is positive, the investigators will conduct a future trial in several hospitals, to test how useful the system is in improving patient recovery.
Detailed Description
The primary objective of this study is to assess the impact of ambulatory monitoring systems (AMS) integration (with active clinical alerts) versus standard care in deterioration detection. Secondary objectives include other deterioration detection and clinical outcomes, trial progression outcomes, staff impact and alerting system performance, overall system reliability and patient experience. This study is a superiority feasibility randomised controlled trial with two-arm parallel groups and 1:1 allocation ratio to compare the use of an ambulatory monitoring system with standard care in hospitalised patients. This feasibility trial will be conducted not only to assess the impact of AMS on early deterioration detection and other clinical outcomes but also to explore recruitment rate, calculate required sample size, number of sites and recruitment period for a full definitive RCT. Participants will be recruited in one or more surgical wards inside Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (to be decided during feasibility trial, dependant on recruitment rate). Patients will be screened, recruited and participate in this study throughout their hospital stay, no follow-up visits will be required. The intervention consists in the use of AMS that also includes an alerting system. Participants will wear one pulse oximeter (WristOx2 3150 OEM BLE, shorted to "Nonin", hereafter) measuring pulse rate (PR) and oxygen saturation (SpO2), one chest patch (VitalPatch) that will continuously measure their heart rate (HR), respiratory rate (RR), temperature,; and one A&D UA-1200 BLE Blood Pressure device, intermittently measuring systolic and diastolic blood pressure, and pulse rate. Clinical staff will be able to access and interact with real-time vital signs through a dashboard style display and will be alerted via a hand-held device, and/or dashboard, according to the patient's EWS score. The control group will also be fitted with these devices. However, clinical staff will not be able to access the dashboard display or receive alerts. The trial will include a calibration period inside a surgical unit were the investigators will refine out alerting system. During this period the investigaotors will optimise our alerts through continuous analysis and feedback from the relevant clinical teams. Randomisation will still be conducted during this period. This feasibility trial will be conducted in surgical units at the John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford University Hospitals (OUH) NHS Foundation Trust. This will: Assess the feasibility of a definitive RCT Support sample size calculation for full study Assess recruitment rate and the need for inclusion of more wards inside OUH.Staff focus groups or interviews will be held to gather feedback on the system which may inform further refinements, including usability, perceived effect on workload and appropriateness of alerts. Multi-professionals staff interviews with be held to assess staff perception of the acceptability of the system in clinical practice. Patients interviews will be held with patient who have worn the monitoring, to gain their perceptions of the system, including wearability, sense of safety and potential improvements.

6. Conditions and Keywords

Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
Surgery, Deterioration, Clinical
Keywords
wearables, clinical monitoring, vital signs

7. Study Design

Primary Purpose
Diagnostic
Study Phase
Not Applicable
Interventional Study Model
Parallel Assignment
Masking
None (Open Label)
Allocation
Randomized
Enrollment
120 (Anticipated)

8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions

Arm Title
AMS group
Arm Type
Experimental
Arm Description
Patients randomised to the intervention group will receive the AMS; this will be connected to the dashboard and the alerting system. Clinical staff will have access to the dashboard and alerted accordingly for the assigned patients.
Arm Title
Standard Care group
Arm Type
Active Comparator
Arm Description
Patients in the control group will also receive the AMS however this will not be connected to the ward dashboard and clinical staff will not be able to access these patient's continuous vital signs: Patient will not appear on the ward dashboard No alerting system will be given to staff
Intervention Type
Device
Intervention Name(s)
Ambulatory monitoring system
Intervention Description
Patients will use AMS.
Intervention Type
Device
Intervention Name(s)
Active alerting system
Intervention Description
Clinical staff alerted if AMS detects deterioration
Primary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Time from first period of unexpected physiological instability to set of observations
Description
To assess the impact of AMS integration (with active clinical alerts) versus standard care in deterioration detection
Time Frame
Throughout patient monitoring period, expected to be anywhere from 2 to 14 days.
Secondary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Frequency of periods of physiological instability.
Description
To assess the impact of AMS integration (with active clinical alerts) versus standard care on instability episodes.
Time Frame
Throughout patient monitoring period, expected to be anywhere from 2 to 14 days.
Title
Frequency of unscheduled interventions
Description
Frequency of unscheduled interventions. The investigators will collect time and frequency To assess the impact of AMS integration (with active clinical alerts) versus standard care on unscheduled interventions. to/of unscheduled interventions (as defined in the above intervention examples) in both groups. This will be collected through completion of the relevant CRF/spreadsheet, collecting the following information: - Unscheduled interventions examples (not limited to these): Antibiotics Acute changes to therapy/medication (e.g. drugs to treat cardiac arrhythmia) Supplementary oxygen Fluids Radiological intervention (x-ray, CT, etc.) Chest physiotherapy
Time Frame
Throughout patient monitoring period, expected to be anywhere from 2 to 14 days.
Title
ICU admission rate
Description
To assess the impact of AMS integration (with active clinical alerts) versus standard care other deterioration related outcomes.
Time Frame
Throughout patient ward and hospital length of stay, expected to be anywhere from 2 to 30 days.
Title
Adverse event/complication rate
Description
To assess the impact of AMS integration (with active clinical alerts) versus standard care other deterioration related outcomes. The investigators will collect all complication and adverse event in both groups. This will be categorised according to the Clavien-Dindo classification.
Time Frame
Throughout patient ward and hospital length of stay, expected to be anywhere from 2 to 30 days.
Title
Cardiac arrest team call frequency
Description
To assess the impact of AMS integration (with active clinical alerts) versus standard care other deterioration related outcomes. Other deterioration detection outcomes include cardiac arrest team activation where the investigators will collect cardiac arrest team calls and compare in both groups.
Time Frame
Throughout patient ward and hospital length of stay, expected to be anywhere from 2 to 30 days.
Title
Time difference between deterioration detection by nurse and AMS (control group only).
Description
To assess the potential impact of AMS integration in deterioration detection of the control group Time difference between deterioration detection by nurse and AMS. As participants in the control group will also be wearing these devices the investigators aim to assess the time difference (in minutes) between the first unexpected deterioration occurred (as defined above) and clinical staff detected it. The investigators will also explore time difference to intervention and related clinical outcomes.
Time Frame
Throughout patient monitoring period, expected to be anywhere from 2 to 14 days.

10. Eligibility

Sex
All
Minimum Age & Unit of Time
18 Years
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria: Patient stable for at least 6 hours with at least one of the following: NEWS2 <= 2 and (in some exceptional NEWS >2 confirmed with clinical staff, eg. patients with comorbidities). Frequency of observations of >4 hours at the time of randomisation. Participant is willing and able to give informed consent for participation in the trial. Male or Female, aged 18 years or above. Any patient admitted to the participating surgical unit (including post-ICU patients) who are not currently monitored with standard continuous monitoring Exclusion Criteria: The participant may not enter the trial if ANY of the following apply: Intra-cardiac device Monitored for less than 24 hours
Central Contact Person:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name or Official Title & Degree
Sarah Vollam, PhD
Phone
+441865 231440
Email
sarah.vollam@ndcn.ox.ac.uk
Overall Study Officials:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Peter Watkinson, MD
Organizational Affiliation
University of Oxford
Official's Role
Principal Investigator
Facility Information:
Facility Name
Oxford University Hospitals Trust
City
Oxford
State/Province
Oxfordshire
ZIP/Postal Code
OX3 9DU
Country
United Kingdom
Individual Site Status
Recruiting
Facility Contact:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Peter Watkinson, MD
Phone
01865231448
Email
ccrg.research@ndcn.ox.ac.uk
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Rachel Henning
Phone
01865231448
Email
ccrg.research@ndcn.ox.ac.uk

12. IPD Sharing Statement

Plan to Share IPD
No
IPD Sharing Plan Description
Requests will be considered on an individual basis.

Learn more about this trial

vHDU Phase 5: Impact of an Ambulatory Monitoring System on Deterioration Detection and Clinical Outcomes

We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs