Acute PainPhase 2NCT00305110
Safety of Hydromorphone in Adult Patients Presenting to the Emergency Department With Acute Severe Pain
A Phase 2 study testing 2 mg IV hydromorphone in people with Acute Pain, run by Montefiore Medical Center at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
The purpose of this study is to determine the safety and speed of onset of 2mg intravenous hydromorphone (Dilaudid) in patients weighing at least 150 lbs presenting to the emergency department with acute severe pain Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 21 to 65 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Acute Pain
- What is being tested?
- 2 mg IV hydromorphone
- Type of treatment
- Injection or infusion
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 298 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- Jan 2006to Oct 2006
- Phase
- Phase 2
- Are there results?
- Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 21 to 65 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Age greater than 21 years
- Age less than 65 years of age
- Pain with onset within 7 days
- ED attending physician's judgment that patient's pain warrants use of morphine
- Normal mental status
Who cannot join
- Prior use of methadone
- Use of other opioids or tramadol within past seven days
- Prior adverse reaction to hydromorphone.
- Chronic pain syndrome
- Alcohol intoxication
- SBP <90 mm Hg
- Use of MAO inhibitors in past 30 days
- C02 measurement greater than 46
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
Montefiore Medical Center
The Bronx, New York, 10467
About this study
Official title: Safety and Speed of Onset of a Fixed Dose of Intravenous Hydromorphone in the Treatment of Adult Patients Presenting to the Emergency Department With Acute Severe Pain
The purpose of this study is to determine the safety and speed of onset of 2mg intravenous hydromorphone (Dilaudid) in patients weighing at least 150 lbs presenting to the emergency department with acute severe pain
Read the detailed description
Introduction and Background: Pain is cited as the most frequent reason for visits to emergency departments (EDs) (McCaig, 2001). It can be estimated from the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey, an annual survey of a representative sample of visits to US EDs, that there are 17 million visits per year to US EDs for specific complaints of pain, 29 million visits including "back symptoms" and "injuries not otherwise specified" as well as specific mentions of pain. However it is widely acknowledged that pain is seriously under-treated in the ED as well as in other health care settings (Ducharme, 1996; Selbst, 1990; Wilson, 1989). The concern regarding under-treatment is reflected in new standards for pain management developed by the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (JCAHO) requiring assessment of pain at triage in the ED and referring to pain measurement as the "fifth vital sign" (Philips, 2000).
Proper pain management is a tremendous challenge to ED physicians as pain is not only a noxious experience but also a symptom of injury and disease that needs to be understood and appropriately treated. Further complicating pain management is the large interpersonal variability in pain perception and expression reflecting cultural, contextual, and individual differences between people. Reasons for under-treating pain include concern over side effects of opioids, perception of pain complaints as possible drug-seeking behavior, under-staffing, concern that analgesics will mask symptoms or delay early diagnosis and treatment, and contribute to risks of tolerance and dependence in vulnerable patients.
Morphine has long been considered the gold standard in pain control. Hydromorphone is another powerful opioid that has been used extensively for the management of post-operative pain and morphine-resistant cancer-related pain. A recent Cochrane review on the use of hydromorphone found 32 studies that focused on acute pain (Quigley, 2003). Of these 32 studies, only 9 involved intravenous forms of hydromorphone (Coda, 1997; Collins, 1996; Deutsch, 1968; Jasani, 1994; Liu, 1995; Mahler, 1975; Rapp, 1996; Searle, 1994; Urquhart, 1988). Of these 8 studies, 5 involved patient controlled analgesia, and only 1 study compared IV hydromorphone to IV morphine (Mahler, 1975). The Cochrane review concludes that there are substantial gaps in the understanding of the efficacy and potency of hydromorphone.
We have recently completed a study in non-elderly adult patients (IRB 04-08-225) that showed that weight-based IV hydromorphone provides better pain relief than weight-based IV morphine. This result was both statistically and clinically significant. We also demonstrated in this same study that IV hydromorphone has a faster onset and also provided statistically significant improvement in pain relief at 5 minutes as compared to IV morphine.
Although weight-based dosing of medications is common in pediatrics, most emergency physicians use whole integer amounts of pain medications. IV hydromorphone is more potent than IV morphine, so the dosages given are much smaller. We therefore wish to give a standard 2 mg dose of IV hydromorphone to all non-elderly adult patients weighing at least 150 lbs presenting to the ED with acute severe pain. We wish to examine the safety and speed of onset of hydromorphone using such a protocol.
Our general thought is that to develop more evidence based practice, we need to generate more practice based evidence. This study attempts to do this as it is practiced based and very practical. We wish to take the drug as it comes (2mg Dilaudid in an ampule) and use all of it, thus alleviating the need to waste the excess opioid (and alleviating the need to find a second person to witness the wasting). We also wish to use a weight cutoff that everyone can remember (150 lbs). We believe that this protocol will provide greater pain relief and help address the issue of inadequate pain treatment, or "oligoanalgesia", that is prominent in the literature (Sobel 2002, Wilson, 1989, Goldfrank 2000).
Finally, in our multiple studies of pain conducted in the ED, we have found a relatively high rate of refusal to receive pain medication. We think this may represent a component to the problem of oligoanalgesia that is widespread in the ED. We wish to investigate the reasons for patient refusal to receiving parental opioid medications (fear of addiction, side effects, etc).
- Conditions
- Acute Pain
- Being tested
- 2 mg IV hydromorphone
- Keywords
- Pain, Acute, Emergency Department, Severe, Hydromorphone, Dilaudid, Adult
- Medical subject headings
- Acute Pain, Pain, Emergencies, Lymphoma, Follicular
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
2 mg IV hydromorphoneDrug
Also called Dilaudid
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| 2 mg IV hydromorphone | Experimental | 2 mg IV hydromorphone administered over 2-3 minutes Receives: Drug: 2 mg IV hydromorphone |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Number of Participants Requiring Naloxone
Naloxone is a reversal agent - a medication that reverses the effects of another. Hydromorphone is an opiate pain medication that acts as a depressant to the body, thereby slowing it down. A large slow down is dangerous, as it can cause the breathing rate to slow down too much and prevent enough oxygen from entering the body and reaching the brain, resulting in death. Naloxone is a medication that blocks the receptors binding opiate pain medication and reversing the body's reaction to the hydromorphone, allowing body processes to return to normal speeds, including the breathing rate. The use of naloxone in the study indicates that the participant received too much pain medication or reacted more strongly than the average person, requiring the rescue medication to reverse the negative effects. The number of participants who required naloxone is assessed.
Measured: immediately after infusion, up to 120 minutes post infusion
Secondary outcomes (4)
Number of Participants Experiencing a Respiratory Rate Lower Than 12 Breaths Per Minute
Normal respiratory rate ranges from 12 to 20 breaths per minute. The decreased respiration results in a decreased amount of oxygen entering the body and therefore low amount of oxygen supplied to the brain. Prolonged oxygen deprivation can result in injury or death. Respiratory rates lower than 12 breaths per minute is a sign of distress. Number of participants experiencing a respiratory rate lower than 12 breaths per minute is measured.
Measured: immediately after infusion, up to 120 minutes post infusion
Number of Participants Experiencing a Systolic Blood Pressure Less Than 90 mmHg
Normal systolic blood pressure is approximately 120 mmHg. A low systolic blood pressure indicates blood, and therefore oxygen, are not being distributed around the body properly. This leads to a decreased amount of oxygen for the body to use and can result in injury or death if prolonged or severe.
Measured: Immediately after infusion, up to 120 minutes post infusion
Oxygen Desaturation Measured Over 2-hour Time Frame
blood oxygen saturation less than 95% is considered oxygen desaturation. Blood oxygen saturation is normally above 95%. Oxygen desaturation of less than 90% is dangerous because there is less oxygen throughout the body for cellular energy. Prolonged or severe blood oxygen desaturation can result in injury or death.
Measured: immediately after infusion, up to 120 minutes post infusion
Oxygen Saturation Measured Over 2-hour Time Frame
blood oxygen saturation is measured periodically from 1 minute to 120 minutes after the medication was infused
Measured: baseline to 120 minutes post infusion
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted21 Mar 2006 (estimated)
- Study startJan 2006
- Primary completionOct 2006
- Study completionOct 2006
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Other trials for Acute PainStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Montefiore Medical CenterThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase 2
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 298 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Montefiore Medical Center
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Andrew Chang, MD, Montefiore Medical Center
- Investigators
- Andrew K Chang, MD, Principal investigator, Montefiore Medical Center
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00305110
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- MMC 0511307
- Status last verified
- Aug 2018
- First submitted
- 17 Mar 2006
- Last updated
- 20 Aug 2018
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 20 Aug 2018. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Safety and Speed of Onset of a Fixed Dose of Intravenous Hydromorphone in the Treatment of Adult Patients Presenting to the Emergency Department With Acute Severe Pain
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00305110
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- MMC 0511307
- Conditions
- Acute Pain
- Keywords
- Pain, Acute, Emergency Department, Severe, Hydromorphone, Dilaudid, Adult
- Phase
- Phase 2
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 298 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Montefiore Medical CenterUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Jan 2006
- Primary completion
- Oct 2006 (actual)
- Study completion
- Oct 2006 (actual)
- First posted
- 21 Mar 2006 (estimated)
- Results
- Posted 20 Aug 2018
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The purpose of this study is to determine the safety and speed of onset of 2mg intravenous hydromorphone (Dilaudid) in patients weighing at least 150 lbs presenting to the emergency department with acute severe pain
Detailed description
Introduction and Background: Pain is cited as the most frequent reason for visits to emergency departments (EDs) (McCaig, 2001). It can be estimated from the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey, an annual survey of a representative sample of visits to US EDs, that there are 17 million visits per year to US EDs for specific complaints of pain, 29 million visits including "back symptoms" and "injuries not otherwise specified" as well as specific mentions of pain. However it is widely acknowledged that pain is seriously under-treated in the ED as well as in other health care settings (Ducharme, 1996; Selbst, 1990; Wilson, 1989). The concern regarding under-treatment is reflected in new standards for pain management developed by the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (JCAHO) requiring assessment of pain at triage in the ED and referring to pain measurement as the "fifth vital sign" (Philips, 2000).
Proper pain management is a tremendous challenge to ED physicians as pain is not only a noxious experience but also a symptom of injury and disease that needs to be understood and appropriately treated. Further complicating pain management is the large interpersonal variability in pain perception and expression reflecting cultural, contextual, and individual differences between people. Reasons for under-treating pain include concern over side effects of opioids, perception of pain complaints as possible drug-seeking behavior, under-staffing, concern that analgesics will mask symptoms or delay early diagnosis and treatment, and contribute to risks of tolerance and dependence in vulnerable patients.
Morphine has long been considered the gold standard in pain control. Hydromorphone is another powerful opioid that has been used extensively for the management of post-operative pain and morphine-resistant cancer-related pain. A recent Cochrane review on the use of hydromorphone found 32 studies that focused on acute pain (Quigley, 2003). Of these 32 studies, only 9 involved intravenous forms of hydromorphone (Coda, 1997; Collins, 1996; Deutsch, 1968; Jasani, 1994; Liu, 1995; Mahler, 1975; Rapp, 1996; Searle, 1994; Urquhart, 1988). Of these 8 studies, 5 involved patient controlled analgesia, and only 1 study compared IV hydromorphone to IV morphine (Mahler, 1975). The Cochrane review concludes that there are substantial gaps in the understanding of the efficacy and potency of hydromorphone.
We have recently completed a study in non-elderly adult patients (IRB 04-08-225) that showed that weight-based IV hydromorphone provides better pain relief than weight-based IV morphine. This result was both statistically and clinically significant. We also demonstrated in this same study that IV hydromorphone has a faster onset and also provided statistically significant improvement in pain relief at 5 minutes as compared to IV morphine.
Although weight-based dosing of medications is common in pediatrics, most emergency physicians use whole integer amounts of pain medications. IV hydromorphone is more potent than IV morphine, so the dosages given are much smaller. We therefore wish to give a standard 2 mg dose of IV hydromorphone to all non-elderly adult patients weighing at least 150 lbs presenting to the ED with acute severe pain. We wish to examine the safety and speed of onset of hydromorphone using such a protocol.
Our general thought is that to develop more evidence based practice, we need to generate more practice based evidence. This study attempts to do this as it is practiced based and very practical. We wish to take the drug as it comes (2mg Dilaudid in an ampule) and use all of it, thus alleviating the need to waste the excess opioid (and alleviating the need to find a second person to witness the wasting). We also wish to use a weight cutoff that everyone can remember (150 lbs). We believe that this protocol will provide greater pain relief and help address the issue of inadequate pain treatment, or "oligoanalgesia", that is prominent in the literature (Sobel 2002, Wilson, 1989, Goldfrank 2000).
Finally, in our multiple studies of pain conducted in the ED, we have found a relatively high rate of refusal to receive pain medication. We think this may represent a component to the problem of oligoanalgesia that is widespread in the ED. We wish to investigate the reasons for patient refusal to receiving parental opioid medications (fear of addiction, side effects, etc).
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 1
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| 2 mg IV hydromorphone | Experimental | Drug: 2 mg IV hydromorphone2 mg IV hydromorphone administered over 2-3 minutes |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 21 to 65 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Age greater than 21 years
- Age less than 65 years of age
- Pain with onset within 7 days
- ED attending physician's judgment that patient's pain warrants use of morphine
- Normal mental status
Key exclusion criteria (8 listed)
- Prior use of methadone
- Use of other opioids or tramadol within past seven days
- Prior adverse reaction to hydromorphone.
- Chronic pain syndrome
- Alcohol intoxication
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| 2 mg IV hydromorphoneAlso: Dilaudid | Drug | 2 mg IV hydromorphone |
Primary outcome
Number of Participants Requiring Naloxone
Time frame: immediately after infusion, up to 120 minutes post infusion
Naloxone is a reversal agent - a medication that reverses the effects of another. Hydromorphone is an opiate pain medication that acts as a depressant to the body, thereby slowing it down. A large slow down is dangerous, as it can cause the breathing rate to slow down too much and prevent enough oxygen from entering the body and reaching the brain, resulting in death. Naloxone is a medication that blocks the receptors binding opiate pain medication and reversing the body's reaction to the hydromorphone, allowing body processes to return to normal speeds, including the breathing rate. The use of naloxone in the study indicates that the participant received too much pain medication or reacted more strongly than the average person, requiring the rescue medication to reverse the negative effects. The number of participants who required naloxone is assessed.
4 secondary outcomes
Number of Participants Experiencing a Respiratory Rate Lower Than 12 Breaths Per Minute
Time frame: immediately after infusion, up to 120 minutes post infusion
Number of Participants Experiencing a Systolic Blood Pressure Less Than 90 mmHg
Time frame: Immediately after infusion, up to 120 minutes post infusion
Oxygen Desaturation Measured Over 2-hour Time Frame
Time frame: immediately after infusion, up to 120 minutes post infusion
Oxygen Saturation Measured Over 2-hour Time Frame
Time frame: baseline to 120 minutes post infusion
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 20 Aug 2018.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
Related trials for Acute Pain
Not yet recruiting
Human Experimental Models of Pain (HEMP)
Acute Pain
RecruitingPhase 2
REctus Sheath Trial
Acute Pain, Postoperative Pain, Acute
Not yet recruitingPhase 2
A Clinical Trial of MK-6916 in Participants With Pain After Bunion Removal Surgery (MK-6916-007)
Pain Management
Not yet recruitingPhase 2
Investigating the Analgesic Potential of (2R,6R)-HNK in Acute Pain in Healthy Volunteers
Healthy Volunteers
Not yet recruiting
Post-operative Pain and Clinical Outcome After Single-cone Obturation With a Calcium Silicate-based Versus Epoxy Resin Sealer
Post Operative Pain, Acute, Irreversible Pulpitis (Toothache)
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Andrew K Chang, MD principal investigator
Montefiore Medical Center
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 2 study testing 2 mg IV hydromorphone in people with Acute Pain, run by Montefiore Medical Center at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 5 inclusion and 8 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 20 Aug 2018. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
What does this phase mean?
Phase 2 studies give the treatment to a larger group to see whether it has the intended effect and to keep checking safety.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
Are results available for this study?
Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 20 Aug 2018). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Number of Participants Requiring Naloxone (time frame: immediately after infusion, up to 120 minutes post infusion). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 20 Aug 2018.