Assessment of Infection Control, Practice Efficiency, and Health Economics of Sheathed Versus Standard Cystoscopy

August 13, 2018 updated by: Wake Forest University Health Sciences

Assessment of Infection Control, Practice Efficiency, and Health Economics of Sheathed Versus Standard Flexible Cystoscopy

The purpose of this research study is to compare the effectiveness and efficiency of using a sterile sheath (EndoSheath®) during cystoscopy versus a standard scope.

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 increasing costs in health care and enhanced infection control requirements necessitate the efficient and reliable use of frequently used techniques like cystoscopy. The health economics of cystoscopy are dependent on maintaining low levels of post-cystoscopy sequelae like urinary tract infection (UTI) and its potential precursors, significant asymptomatic bacteriuria and leukocytosis. Another key component of the economics and efficiency of cystoscopy is the time and cost related to the reprocessing of these devices in preparation for re-use. The use of disposable endoscope sheaths may limit the need for high level disinfection (HLD) between procedures and reduce reprocessing time and potentially prolong the cystoscope lifespan. The rationale for this study is to determine if a sheathed cystoscopy system would provide the desired cost and efficiency advantages compared to procedures done with non-sheathed cystoscopes. This is a prospective, randomized, parallel group, single center clinical trial to assess the clinical outcomes, practice efficiency and health economics of the use of sheathed cystoscopes (EndoSheath® System) compared to using standard (non-sheathed) cystoscopes. The study will evaluate the infection control (via the change in bacteriuria), clinical practice efficiency and costs of the EndoSheath technology with CST 5000 scope compared to standard cystoscopy with Olympus Visera Elite OTV-S190 digital flexible scope. There will be 30 subjects in the control group undergoing cystoscopy with the standard scope at the clinic, the Olympus Visera Elite, and 30 subjects in the study group undergoing cystoscopy with the EndoSheath system. The study is designed as a prospective, randomized controlled trial. There will be no active blinding of clinicians or subjects; however, it is anticipated that most subjects will be unaware of differences in the cystoscopy equipment that will be utilized in their routine procedures.

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.
60

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
    • North Carolina
      • Winston-Salem, North Carolina, United States, 27103
        • Wake Forest Baptist Health - Department of Urology

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:

  • Males and females, at least 18 years of age or older
  • Patients undergoing de novo or follow up diagnostic or therapeutic cystoscopy procedures in a Urology clinic setting
  • Antibiotic-free for at least 7 days prior to cystoscopy procedure
  • Patients willing to return to the clinic at approximately two weeks (10 -14 days) post-procedure for a urine test

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Patients with significant lower urinary tract obstruction, gross hematuria
  • Patients having an acute pelvic inflammatory disease or symptomatic UTI
  • Patients with urethral strictures
  • Patients with chronic pain conditions
  • Patients unwilling to return to the clinic at approximately two weeks (10 -14 days) for a urine test

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: Supportive Care
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Triple

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.
Experimental: EndoSheath CST-5000 Scope
Cogentix Medical CST-5000 Flexible Video Cystoscope with Slide-On® EndoSheath® Technology. EndoSheath CST-5000 Scope.
Device: EndoSheath CST-5000 Scope
Cystoscopic procedures will be performed using the EndoSheath CST-5000 Scope.
Active Comparator: Olympus Visera Elite OTV-S190 Scope
Olympus HD Flexible Cysto-Nephro Videoscope (CYF-VH) with Olympus Visera Elite Platform, including OTV-S190 Video Processor CLV-S190 Xenon Light Source. Olympus Visera Elite OTV-S190 Scope.
Device: Olympus Visera Elite OTV-S190 Scope
Cystoscopic procedures will be performed using the Olympus Visera Elite OTV-S190 Scope

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
Number of Participants Who Had Post-Procedure Bacteriuria
Time Frame: 10-14 Days Post Procedure
The primary endpoint will be the change in bacteriuria pre- and post-procedure between EndoSheath CST-5000 cystoscope and standard (non-sheathed) Olympus Visera Elite OTV-S190 cystoscope during the course of routine clinical use in a urology clinic. The pre-procedure measurement of bacteriuria will occur on the day of the procedure. The post-procedure measurement of bacteriuria will occur approximately two weeks (10-14 days) post-procedure. This will be assessed by urine culture exams.
10-14 Days Post Procedure

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
Number of Cystoscopes With Positive Bioburden Post-procedure.
Time Frame: Immediately after cystoscopy.
Immediately after completion of each cystoscopy procedure, the bioburden on the cystoscopes will be evaluated. The flexible cystoscope sheath was removed for bioburden assessment. For each cystoscope, whether sheathed or standard, two locations were assessed - the control body and the shaft. Cultures were obtained wiping the entire surface with sterile saline pledgets. The sample pledgets were placed in 1 ml sterile saline and shaken for 30 seconds. Ten drops of 0.02 ml aliquots from the sample were spotted on two 5% blood agar plates and incubated at 35°C in CO2.
Immediately after cystoscopy.
Total Time to Reprocess a Cystoscope
Time Frame: Beginning from the time a cystoscope is withdrawn from the urethral meatus at the end of a procedure until the completion of reprocessing, approximately 3,869 seconds
The total time required for a cystoscope to be reprocessed so that it is available for re-use in a subsequent procedure will be measured.
Beginning from the time a cystoscope is withdrawn from the urethral meatus at the end of a procedure until the completion of reprocessing, approximately 3,869 seconds
Subject Assessment of Procedure.
Time Frame: Approximately 2 min after the end of procedure.
After undergoing cystoscopy, patients will be asked to complete Visual Analog Scales (VAS) instruments to determine their level of pain experienced during cystoscopy as well as their perception of discomfort with the procedure. The score range is 0 to 100. Higher scores denotes worse outcomes.
Approximately 2 min after the end of procedure.
Staff Assessment of Cystoscope Reprocessing.
Time Frame: At the end of day of each procedure during 6 months
At the end of each day while the study is in progress, 6 members of the medical staff directly involved with the reprocessing of cystoscopes will evaluate the ease of reprocessing based on a 5-point Likert scale for the following parameters: ease of Insertion, ease of manipulation, optical quality, overall ease of use. The score range is 0 to 5. Higher score denotes better outcomes. A single value was derived per staff member and summarized for the group as a whole during 6 months.
At the end of day of each procedure during 6 months
Total Cost of Cystoscopy Reprocessing
Time Frame: 6 months
The health economics of reprocessing will be evaluated by associating personnel hourly costs with cystoscope reprocessing time segments. The total cost was averaged between pre-cleaning, cleaning, disinfection, rinsing, and drying for the 30 cystoscopes in each group for a duration of 6 months.
6 months
Number of Procedures Per Day Per Scope.
Time Frame: Per day.
Number of procedures per day per scope. On a daily basis urology outpatient clinic performs an average of 5 cystoscopies.
Per day.

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.
Wake Forest University Health Sciences

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.
Cogenix Medical Corporation

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.
  • Principal Investigator: Gopal H Badlani, M.D., Wake Forest University Health Sciences

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.
March 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.
December 1, 2016

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.
December 1, 2016

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).
September 2, 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.
October 3, 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.
October 4, 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.
September 12, 2018

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.
August 13, 2018

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.
August 1, 2018

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.
  • IRB00036203

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

Undecided

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

Yes

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