Anesthesiology Control Tower (ACTFAST)

January 21, 2020 updated by: Michael Avidan, Washington University School of Medicine

Anesthesiology Control Tower: Feedback Alerts to Supplement Treatments (ACTFAST)

This study is a pragmatic, comparative effectiveness trial that will randomize approximately 12,000 adult surgical patients on an operating room (OR) level to a control or to an intervention group. All OR clinicians will have access to decision support software within the OR as a part of enhanced standard intraoperative care. The ACT will monitor patients in both groups and will provide additional support to the clinicians assigned to intervention ORs.

Study Overview

Status

Status

Indicates the current recruitment status or the expanded access status.
Completed

Conditions

Conditions

The disease, disorder, syndrome, illness, or injury that is being studied. On ClinicalTrials.gov, conditions may also include other health-related issues, such as lifespan, quality of life, and health risks.

Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.

Detailed Description

The study will logically build on our previous work and utilize the already established infrastructure and resources of the intra-operative electronic medical record and the AlertWatch® alerting system. In conceptualizing this pilot study, as well as a larger follow-up trial focused on clinical outcomes, we have been mindful of challenges put forward to investigators by the National Institutes of Health, which seek to support low-cost, pragmatic, patient-centered randomized controlled trials. Specifically in relation to ACTFAST, (1) the highly developed, specialized IT infrastructure limits the investment required for embarking on this study; (2) the study will be conducted entirely within the context of routine clinical care, negating the need for dedicated trial-related visits; (3) access to registries with granular data on complications and patient-reported outcomes obviates the need for a new and costly infrastructure to track patient outcomes; (4) inclusion of large numbers of broadly representative patients in this study will be highly efficient with a waiver of informed consent. The design for this pilot proof-of-concept study will be a randomized clinical effectiveness trial. It will include a 6-month pre-intervention period during which time the ACT will be staffed but no alerts will be sent. This will allow for the training of controllers, refinement of alerts, and optimization of processes for obtaining and filtering information from diverse electronic sources. Following this period, the trial will begin and run for 12 months. On a daily basis during the study period (weekdays from 7am to 5pm), each operating room in Barnes-Jewish Hospital (BJH) will be eligible for randomization, which will occur using computer-generated assignment. Anesthesiology teams in ORs allocated to the experimental arm will receive the additional support of the ACT in the form of control-tower alerts that complement the AlertWatch® system. The outcomes of interest in this pilot study will be the usability and usefulness of the ACT, clinician adherence to recommendations for monitoring, documentation and therapeutic interventions, key physiologic variables such as temperature and blood pressure. We will also document patient outcomes including duration of postoperative hospital stay, incidence of postoperative morbidity (myocardial infarction, surgical site infection), functional recovery, and postoperative quality of life. Data on these endpoints will inform the design of a subsequent trial focused on clinically relevant outcomes, which will logically follow the current pilot randomized trial. All of the alerts included in this study will be chosen because they follow proven best intraoperative management practice and are in line with national metrics for quality and safety.

Study Type

Study Type

Describes the nature of a clinical study. Study types include interventional studies (also called clinical trials), observational studies (including patient registries), and expanded access.
Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

Enrollment

The number of participants in a clinical study. The "anticipated" enrollment is the target number of participants that the researchers need for the study.
15158

Phase

Phase

The stage of a clinical trial studying a drug or biological product, based on definitions developed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The phase is based on the study's objective, the number of participants, and other characteristics. There are five phases: Early Phase 1 (formerly listed as Phase 0), Phase 1, Phase 2, Phase 3, and Phase 4. Not Applicable is used to describe trials without FDA-defined phases, including trials of devices or behavioral interventions.
  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

  • United States
    • Missouri
      • Saint Louis, Missouri, United States, 63110
        • Washington University School of Medicine

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

The key requirements that people who want to participate in a clinical study must meet or the characteristics they must have. Eligibility criteria consist of both inclusion criteria (which are required for a person to participate in the study) and exclusion criteria (which prevent a person from participating). Types of eligibility criteria include whether a study accepts healthy volunteers, has age or age group requirements, or is limited by sex.

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • On a daily basis during the study period (weekdays from 7am to 5pm), each operating room of Barnes-Jewish Hospital (BJH) will be eligible for randomization, which will occur at the level of the operating room using computer-generated assignment.

Exclusion Criteria:

-

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Other
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Single

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm

Participant Group / Arm

A group or subgroup of participants in a clinical trial that receives a specific intervention/treatment, or no intervention, according to the trial's protocol.
Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.
No Intervention: Anesthesiology Control Tower Control
Patients managed by anesthesia teams without feedback alerts from the ACT
Experimental: Anesthesiology Control Tower Feedback
Patients managed by anesthesia teams with feedback alerts from the ACT
Other: Anesthesiology Control Tower Feedback
Clinicians in the Anesthesiology Control Tower will provide extra support for the anesthesiology team in the operating room.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, the planned outcome measure that is the most important for evaluating the effect of an intervention/treatment. Most clinical studies have one primary outcome measure, but some have more than one.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Compliance with recommendations for intraoperative temperature management
Time Frame: 1 day
Proportion of patients with final recorded temperature in OR greater than 36 degrees Celsiustemperature, the target for this outcome was that the ACT intervention will increase the proportion of patients whose final recorded intraoperative temperature is above 36 degrees Celsius from 60% to 95%. For this calculation we assumed a standard deviation of core temperature of 0.9 degrees Celsius for both groups based on an unpublished EMR audit.
1 day
Compliance with recommendations for intraoperative blood glucose management
Time Frame: 1 day
Proportion of cases with blood glucose <=180 mg/dL upon arrival to the anesthesia recovery area
1 day
Assess the usability of the Anesthesiology Control Tower (ACT) for an operating suite
Time Frame: 2 years
Usability and usefulness are key features of successful implementation of new information technologies 24,99,100. The success of the proof-of-concept ACT implementation and its perceived usefulness and usability depend on participation and support of the entire anesthetic team. Our usability testing procedure will explore the 5Es (effectiveness, efficiency, engagement, error tolerance, ease of learning) needed to develop a useful and usable resource.
2 years

Secondary Outcome Measures

Secondary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, a planned outcome measure that is not as important as the primary outcome measure for evaluating the effect of an intervention but is still of interest. Most clinical studies have more than one secondary outcome measure.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Intraoperative blood pressure management
Time Frame: 1 day
Mean duration of time spent with Mean Arterial Pressure < 60 mmHg
1 day
Temperature monitoring
Time Frame: 1 day
Proportion of procedures lasting greater than 1 hour with documented temperature
1 day
Antibiotic dosing
Time Frame: 1 day
Proportion of procedures with appropriate administration of repeat doses of antibiotics
1 day
Intraoperative blood glucose management
Time Frame: 1 day
Proportion of cases with at least one dose of insulin administered for blood glucose greater than 180 mg/dL Intraoperative measurement of blood glucose in patients with type 1 diabetes undergoing cases >= 1 hour in length and patients with type 2 diabetes undergoing cases > 2 hours in length
1 day
Train of four documentation
Time Frame: 1 day
Proportion of cases with a train of four documented prior to extubation if a nondepolarizing neuromuscular blocking agent was administered
1 day
Ventilator management
Time Frame: 1 day
Proportion of cases with median tidal volume less than 10 mL/kg ideal body mass
1 day
Volatile anesthetic utilization
Time Frame: 1 day
Mean and standard deviation of fresh gas flow rates for cases with volatile anesthetic use > 80% of case duration
1 day
Postoperative acute renal failure
Time Frame: 30 days
Incidence of individual outcomes
30 days
Postoperative atrial fibrillation
Time Frame: 30 days
Incidence of individual outcomes
30 days
Postoperative respiratory failure
Time Frame: 30 days
Incidence of individual outcome
30 days
Postoperative delirium
Time Frame: 30 days
Incidence of individual outcome
30 days
Intraoperative awareness
Time Frame: 30 days
Incidence of individual outcomes
30 days
Surgical site infection
Time Frame: 30 days
Incidence of individual outcomes
30 days
30-day readmission
Time Frame: 30 days
Incidence of individual outcomes
30 days
30-day mortality
Time Frame: 30 days
Mortality will be assessed at 30 days
30 days

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Sponsor

The organization or person who initiates the study and who has authority and control over the study.
Washington University School of Medicine

Collaborators

Collaborators

An organization other than the sponsor that provides support for a clinical study. This support may include activities related to funding, design, implementation, data analysis, or reporting.
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ)

Investigators

Investigators

A researcher involved in a clinical study. Related terms include site principal investigator, site sub-investigator, study chair, study director, and study principal investigator.
  • Study Director: Daniel Helsten, MD, Washington University School of Medicine
  • Study Director: Anshuman Sharma, MD, Washington University School of Medicine
  • Study Director: Richard Benzinger, MD, Washington University School of Medicine
  • Study Director: Yixin Chen, PhD, Washington University School of Medicine
  • Study Director: Mitchell Fingerman, MD, Washington University School of Medicine
  • Study Director: Jason Gillihan, MD, Washington University School of Medicine
  • Study Director: Ryan Guffey, MD, Washington University School of Medicine
  • Study Director: Rocco Hueneke, MD, Washington University School of Medicine
  • Study Director: Joseph F Kras, MD, DDS, MA, Washington University School of Medicine
  • Study Director: Anand Lakshminarasimhachar, MD, Washington University School of Medicine
  • Study Director: Teresa Murray, MD, Washington University School of Medicine
  • Study Director: Rashmi Rathor, MD, Washington University School of Medicine
  • Study Director: Tracey Stevens, MD, Washington University School of Medicine
  • Study Director: Martha Z Szabo, MD, Washington University School of Medicine
  • Study Director: Swarup S Varaday, MD, Washington University School of Medicine
  • Study Director: Troy Wildes, MD, Washington University School of Medicine
  • Study Director: Branden E Yee, MD, Washington University School of Medicine
  • Principal Investigator: Bradley Fritz, MD, Washington University School of Medicine
  • Principal Investigator: Mary C Politi, PhD, Washington University School of Medicine
  • Principal Investigator: Stephen Gregory, MD, Washington University School of Medicine
  • Study Director: Menelaos Karanikolas, MD, Washington University School of Medicine
  • Study Director: Helga Komen, MD, Washington University School of Medicine
  • Study Chair: Ivan Kangrga, MD, Washington University School of Medicine
  • Study Director: Justin Knittel, MD, Washington University School of Medicine
  • Study Director: Jonathan Zoller, MD, Washington University School of Medicine

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

General Publications

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

Study Start

The actual date on which the first participant was enrolled in a clinical study. The "anticipated" study start date is the date that the researchers think will be the study start date.
November 1, 2016

Primary Completion (Actual)

Primary Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention to collect final data for the primary outcome measure. Whether the clinical study ended according to the protocol or was terminated does not affect this date. For clinical studies with more than one primary outcome measure with different completion dates, this term refers to the date on which data collection is completed for all the primary outcome measures. The "anticipated" primary completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the primary completion date for the study.
June 30, 2019

Study Completion (Actual)

Study Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention/treatment to collect final data for the primary outcome measures, secondary outcome measures, and adverse events (that is, the last participant's last visit). The "anticipated" study completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the study completion date.
June 30, 2019

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

First Submitted

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submitted a study record to ClinicalTrials.gov. There is typically a delay of a few days between the first submitted date and the record's availability on ClinicalTrials.gov (the first posted date).
July 7, 2016

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submits a study record that is consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. The sponsor or investigator may need to revise and submit a study record one or more times before NLM's QC review criteria are met. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
July 7, 2016

First Posted (Estimate)

First Posted

The date on which the study record was first available on ClinicalTrials.gov after National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review has concluded. There is typically a delay of a few days between the date the study sponsor or investigator submitted the study record and the first posted date.
July 12, 2016

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

Last Update Posted

The most recent date on which changes to a study record were made available on ClinicalTrials.gov. There may be a delay between when the changes were submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov by the study's sponsor or investigator (the last update submitted date) and the last update posted date.
January 22, 2020

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator submitted changes to a study record that are consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
January 21, 2020

Last Verified

Last Verified

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator confirmed the information about a clinical study on ClinicalTrials.gov as accurate and current. If a study with a recruitment status of recruiting; not yet recruiting; or active, not recruiting has not been confirmed within the past 2 years, the study's recruitment status is shown as unknown.
January 1, 2020

More Information

Terms related to this study

Keywords

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

Other Study ID Numbers

Identifiers or ID numbers other than the NCT number that are assigned to a clinical study by the study's sponsor, funders, or others. These numbers may include unique identifiers from other trial registries and National Institutes of Health grant numbers.
  • 201603038
  • 1R21HS024581-01A1 (U.S. AHRQ Grant/Contract)

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Cookie Settings

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. For more details carefully read our Privacy and Cookies Policy. ...>>>You can change your preferences or withdraw your consent at any time by deleting the cookies from your website or computer as described in the policy. Please accept it and choose your preferences by ticking the corresponding boxes in the "Manage Settings" section below. Please carefully read our Terms of Service before you proceed with using any part of this website.
«Manage Settings