Criteria of VulnerabilityLATAREA-IVNCT02471976
Impact of an Early Palliative Approach
A study testing strategy promoting early consideration and collegiate vulnerability of patients in people with Criteria of Vulnerability, run by Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris at 1 site in France.
Trial summary
Rationale: Medicalized end of life rose profound society questions and debates. Major Laws and scientific society recommendations emerged from those reflections. These texts help withholding/withdrawing life-sustaining treatments allowing a palliative approach and to favor comfort treatments for end of life patients. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Criteria of Vulnerability
- What is being tested?
- strategy promoting early consideration and collegiate vulnerability of patients
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 1,172 participants
- Where
- 1 siteFrance
- Study dates
- Oct 2012to Dec 2015
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
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 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Surgical patients (who undergone surgery or not) hospitalized in ICU during the study period
- No opposition to the use of data collected from the patient or a relative or inclusion in emergency and non-opposition collected offline
Who cannot join
- Patients admitted legally dead or brain-dead
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Impact of a Computer-assisted Tool to Help Reflection on the Decision to Withhold or to Withdraw Treatments for Surgical Patients in Intensive Care Units
Rationale: Medicalized end of life rose profound society questions and debates. Major Laws and scientific society recommendations emerged from those reflections. These texts help withholding/withdrawing life-sustaining treatments allowing a palliative approach and to favor comfort treatments for end of life patients.
Main Objective: To evaluate the impact of a procedure to support reflection on the level of therapeutic involvement for surgical patient (who undergone surgery or not) in ICU after having identified vulnerability criteria early.
Read more
Secondary objectives: To assess the usual care of the control group and the impact of the procedure according to ICU type (medical, surgical, mixed); the characteristics of surgical patients concerned by a palliative strategy; the impact of an incentive approach on length of mechanical ventilation and length of stay in the ICU; To measure the extent of information collected concerning the collegial process; the impact of the procedure on caregivers' satisfaction; To count the number of identified conflicts Study type: Prospective, controlled, cluster randomized study of routine care Purpose: Study the implementation of the Act "Leonetti" released on 22 April 2005 calling for a compassionate approach and palliative care for patients at end of life.
Inclusion criteria: Surgical patients (who undergone surgery or not) hospitalized in ICU during the study period Non-inclusion criteria: Patients hospitalized less than 24h; non-surgical patients; patients who don't need ICU care or surveillance; minors; brain-dead patients (at the time of admission) Primary endpoint: Rate of deaths with palliative strategy (withholding or withdrawing treatments) Randomization process: each center is randomized adjusting on type of ICU (medical, surgical, mixed) and number of annual hospitalization volume.
- Control group: ICU usual care
- Intervention group: vulnerability criteria lead to reflection on level of therapeutic involvement, with the help of a written guide.
Number of patients: 2750 surgical patients Number of centers: 45 Study design: usual data will be collected in a secured web-based Case Report Form (CRF) at ICU admission and each time therapeutic strategy will change. Additional data will be collected for the intervention group according to the initial presence or the later apparition of predefined criteria, a standardized reflection procedure will start helped by the implementation of a guide for collegial approach and decision making.
Length: 30 months
- Conditions
- Criteria of Vulnerability
- Being tested
- strategy promoting early consideration and collegiate vulnerability of patients
- Keywords
- Leonetti law, palliative care
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
strategy promoting early consideration and collegiate vulnerability of patientsOther
One day training with the provision of vulnerability criteria inciting an early reflection of the level of therapeutic engagement; sheets available on the internet computer support collegial reflection and traceability of decisions to limit and stop treatments, incorporating the provisions of law known Leonetti
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Group A | No intervention | the centres applies their usual practices |
| Group B | Other | strategy promoting early consideration and collegiate vulnerability of patients Receives: Other: strategy promoting early consideration and collegiate vulnerability of patients |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Number of participants dead with palliative strategy
Rate of death with collegial process and withdrawing/withholding treatment
Measured: From ICU hospitalization to 6 months after inclusion
Secondary outcomes (6)
Impact of the procedure according to ICU type
Measured: From ICU hospitalization to 6 months after inclusion
Characteristics of surgical patients concerned by a palliative strategy
Measured: From ICU hospitalization to 6 months after inclusion
Impact of an incentive approach on length of mechanical ventilation and length of stay in the ICU.
Measured: From ICU hospitalization to 6 months after inclusion
Extent of information collected concerning the collegial process
Measured: From ICU hospitalization to 6 months after inclusion
Impact of the procedure on caregivers' satisfaction
Measured: From ICU hospitalization to 6 months after inclusion
Number of identified conflicts
Measured: From ICU hospitalization to 6 months after inclusion
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted15 Jun 2015 (estimated)
- Study startOct 2012
- Primary completionJan 2014
- Study completionDec 2015
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (8)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Criteria of VulnerabilityStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de ParisThe 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 N/A
- Primary purpose
- Supportive care
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 1,172 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Edouard FERRAND, MD, Principal investigator, Hôpital FOCH
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02471976
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- K071203
- Acronym
- LATAREA-IV
- Status last verified
- Jun 2017
- First submitted
- 1 Jun 2015
- Last updated
- 20 Jun 2017
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Publications
Ferrand E, Jabre P, Vincent-Genod C, Aubry R, Badet M, Badia P, Cariou A, Ellien F, Gounant V, Gil R, Jaber S, Jay S, Paillaud E, Poulain P, Regnier B, Reignier J, Socie G, Tardy B, Lemaire F, Brun-Buisson C, Marty J; French Mort-a-l'Hopital Group. Circumstances of death in hospitalized patients and nurses' perceptions: French multicenter Mort-a-l'Hopital survey. Arch Intern Med. 2008 Apr 28;168(8):867-75. doi: 10.1001/archinte.168.8.867.
PubMed 18443263Ferrand E, Robert R, Ingrand P, Lemaire F; French LATAREA Group. Withholding and withdrawal of life support in intensive-care units in France: a prospective survey. French LATAREA Group. Lancet. 2001 Jan 6;357(9249):9-14. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(00)03564-9.
PubMed 11197395Ferrand E, Lemaire F, Regnier B, Kuteifan K, Badet M, Asfar P, Jaber S, Chagnon JL, Renault A, Robert R, Pochard F, Herve C, Brun-Buisson C, Duvaldestin P; French RESSENTI Group. Discrepancies between perceptions by physicians and nursing staff of intensive care unit end-of-life decisions. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2003 May 15;167(10):1310-5. doi: 10.1164/rccm.200207-752OC. Epub 2003 Jan 24.
PubMed 12738597Truog RD, Cist AF, Brackett SE, Burns JP, Curley MA, Danis M, DeVita MA, Rosenbaum SH, Rothenberg DM, Sprung CL, Webb SA, Wlody GS, Hurford WE. Recommendations for end-of-life care in the intensive care unit: The Ethics Committee of the Society of Critical Care Medicine. Crit Care Med. 2001 Dec;29(12):2332-48. doi: 10.1097/00003246-200112000-00017. No abstract available.
PubMed 11801837Ferrand E, Marty J; French LATASAMU Group. Prehospital withholding and withdrawal of life-sustaining treatments. The French LATASAMU survey. Intensive Care Med. 2006 Oct;32(10):1498-505. doi: 10.1007/s00134-006-0292-5. Epub 2006 Aug 2.
PubMed 16896861Prendergast TJ, Claessens MT, Luce JM. A national survey of end-of-life care for critically ill patients. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1998 Oct;158(4):1163-7. doi: 10.1164/ajrccm.158.4.9801108.
PubMed 9769276Sprung CL, Cohen SL, Sjokvist P, Baras M, Bulow HH, Hovilehto S, Ledoux D, Lippert A, Maia P, Phelan D, Schobersberger W, Wennberg E, Woodcock T; Ethicus Study Group. End-of-life practices in European intensive care units: the Ethicus Study. JAMA. 2003 Aug 13;290(6):790-7. doi: 10.1001/jama.290.6.790.
PubMed 12915432Ferrand E, Jabre P, Fernandez-Curiel S, Morin F, Vincent-Genod C, Duvaldestin P, Lemaire F, Herve C, Marty J. Participation of French general practitioners in end-of-life decisions for their hospitalised patients. J Med Ethics. 2006 Dec;32(12):683-7. doi: 10.1136/jme.2005.014084.
PubMed 17145904
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 20 Jun 2017. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Impact of a Computer-assisted Tool to Help Reflection on the Decision to Withhold or to Withdraw Treatments for Surgical Patients in Intensive Care Units
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02471976
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- LATAREA-IV / K071203
- Conditions
- Criteria of Vulnerability
- Keywords
- Leonetti law, palliative care
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 1,172 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de ParisUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Oct 2012 (actual)
- Primary completion
- Jan 2014 (actual)
- Study completion
- Dec 2015 (actual)
- First posted
- 15 Jun 2015 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Rationale: Medicalized end of life rose profound society questions and debates. Major Laws and scientific society recommendations emerged from those reflections. These texts help withholding/withdrawing life-sustaining treatments allowing a palliative approach and to favor comfort treatments for end of life patients.
Main Objective: To evaluate the impact of a procedure to support reflection on the level of therapeutic involvement for surgical patient (who undergone surgery or not) in ICU after having identified vulnerability criteria early.
Secondary objectives: To assess the usual care of the control group and the impact of the procedure according to ICU type (medical, surgical, mixed); the characteristics of surgical patients concerned by a palliative strategy; the impact of an incentive approach on length of mechanical ventilation and length of stay in the ICU; To measure the extent of information collected concerning the collegial process; the impact of the procedure on caregivers' satisfaction; To count the number of identified conflicts Study type: Prospective, controlled, cluster randomized study of routine care Purpose: Study the implementation of the Act "Leonetti" released on 22 April 2005 calling for a compassionate approach and palliative care for patients at end of life.
Inclusion criteria: Surgical patients (who undergone surgery or not) hospitalized in ICU during the study period Non-inclusion criteria: Patients hospitalized less than 24h; non-surgical patients; patients who don't need ICU care or surveillance; minors; brain-dead patients (at the time of admission) Primary endpoint: Rate of deaths with palliative strategy (withholding or withdrawing treatments) Randomization process: each center is randomized adjusting on type of ICU (medical, surgical, mixed) and number of annual hospitalization volume.
- Control group: ICU usual care
- Intervention group: vulnerability criteria lead to reflection on level of therapeutic involvement, with the help of a written guide.
Number of patients: 2750 surgical patients Number of centers: 45 Study design: usual data will be collected in a secured web-based Case Report Form (CRF) at ICU admission and each time therapeutic strategy will change. Additional data will be collected for the intervention group according to the initial presence or the later apparition of predefined criteria, a standardized reflection procedure will start helped by the implementation of a guide for collegial approach and decision making.
Length: 30 months
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Supportive care
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Group A | No intervention | –the centres applies their usual practices |
| Group B | Other | Other: strategy promoting early consideration and collegiate vulnerability of patientsstrategy promoting early consideration and collegiate vulnerability of patients |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Surgical patients (who undergone surgery or not) hospitalized in ICU during the study period
- No opposition to the use of data collected from the patient or a relative or inclusion in emergency and non-opposition collected offline
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Patients admitted legally dead or brain-dead
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 |
|---|---|---|
| strategy promoting early consideration and collegiate vulnerability of patientsOne day training with the provision of vulnerability criteria inciting an early reflection of the level of therapeutic engagement; sheets available on the internet computer support collegial reflection and traceability of decisions to limit and stop treatments, incorporating the provisions of law known Leonetti | Other | Group B |
Primary outcome
Number of participants dead with palliative strategy
Time frame: From ICU hospitalization to 6 months after inclusion
Rate of death with collegial process and withdrawing/withholding treatment
6 secondary outcomes
Impact of the procedure according to ICU type
Time frame: From ICU hospitalization to 6 months after inclusion
Characteristics of surgical patients concerned by a palliative strategy
Time frame: From ICU hospitalization to 6 months after inclusion
Impact of an incentive approach on length of mechanical ventilation and length of stay in the ICU.
Time frame: From ICU hospitalization to 6 months after inclusion
Extent of information collected concerning the collegial process
Time frame: From ICU hospitalization to 6 months after inclusion
Impact of the procedure on caregivers' satisfaction
Time frame: From ICU hospitalization to 6 months after inclusion
Number of identified conflicts
Time frame: From ICU hospitalization to 6 months after inclusion
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 20 Jun 2017.
- Background: PubMed 18443263Ferrand E, Jabre P, Vincent-Genod C, Aubry R, Badet M, Badia P, Cariou A, Ellien F, Gounant V, Gil R, Jaber S, Jay S, Paillaud E, Poulain P, Regnier B, Reignier J, Socie G, Tardy B, Lemaire F, Brun-Buisson C, Marty J; French Mort-a-l'Hopital Group. Circumstances of death in hospitalized patients and nurses' perceptions: French multicenter Mort-a-l'Hopital survey. Arch Intern Med. 2008 Apr 28;168(8):867-75. doi: 10.1001/archinte.168.8.867.
- Background: PubMed 11197395Ferrand E, Robert R, Ingrand P, Lemaire F; French LATAREA Group. Withholding and withdrawal of life support in intensive-care units in France: a prospective survey. French LATAREA Group. Lancet. 2001 Jan 6;357(9249):9-14. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(00)03564-9.
- Background: PubMed 12738597Ferrand E, Lemaire F, Regnier B, Kuteifan K, Badet M, Asfar P, Jaber S, Chagnon JL, Renault A, Robert R, Pochard F, Herve C, Brun-Buisson C, Duvaldestin P; French RESSENTI Group. Discrepancies between perceptions by physicians and nursing staff of intensive care unit end-of-life decisions. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2003 May 15;167(10):1310-5. doi: 10.1164/rccm.200207-752OC. Epub 2003 Jan 24.
- Background: PubMed 11801837Truog RD, Cist AF, Brackett SE, Burns JP, Curley MA, Danis M, DeVita MA, Rosenbaum SH, Rothenberg DM, Sprung CL, Webb SA, Wlody GS, Hurford WE. Recommendations for end-of-life care in the intensive care unit: The Ethics Committee of the Society of Critical Care Medicine. Crit Care Med. 2001 Dec;29(12):2332-48. doi: 10.1097/00003246-200112000-00017. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 16896861Ferrand E, Marty J; French LATASAMU Group. Prehospital withholding and withdrawal of life-sustaining treatments. The French LATASAMU survey. Intensive Care Med. 2006 Oct;32(10):1498-505. doi: 10.1007/s00134-006-0292-5. Epub 2006 Aug 2.
- Background: PubMed 9769276Prendergast TJ, Claessens MT, Luce JM. A national survey of end-of-life care for critically ill patients. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1998 Oct;158(4):1163-7. doi: 10.1164/ajrccm.158.4.9801108.
- Background: PubMed 12915432Sprung CL, Cohen SL, Sjokvist P, Baras M, Bulow HH, Hovilehto S, Ledoux D, Lippert A, Maia P, Phelan D, Schobersberger W, Wennberg E, Woodcock T; Ethicus Study Group. End-of-life practices in European intensive care units: the Ethicus Study. JAMA. 2003 Aug 13;290(6):790-7. doi: 10.1001/jama.290.6.790.
- Background: PubMed 17145904Ferrand E, Jabre P, Fernandez-Curiel S, Morin F, Vincent-Genod C, Duvaldestin P, Lemaire F, Herve C, Marty J. Participation of French general practitioners in end-of-life decisions for their hospitalised patients. J Med Ethics. 2006 Dec;32(12):683-7. doi: 10.1136/jme.2005.014084.
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.
Edouard FERRAND, MD principal investigator
Hôpital FOCH
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing strategy promoting early consideration and collegiate vulnerability of patients in people with Criteria of Vulnerability, run by Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris at 1 site in France.
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 2 inclusion and 1 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 Jun 2017. 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 France. 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.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
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 dead with palliative strategy (time frame: From ICU hospitalization to 6 months after inclusion). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT02471976, which also lists 8 linked publications.
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 Jun 2017.