IV Oral SwitchSTORMNCT03254407
Switch Timely to Oral Medication
A study testing Screening medical record in people with IV Oral Switch and Appropriateness Review, run by Universitaire Ziekenhuizen KU Leuven at 1 site in Belgium.
Trial summary
The goal of this study compare the effectiveness of an electronic note versus a telephone call to alert the prescriber of a possible IV to oral switch. Secondary endpoints are the time-to-switch and the economic impact of earlier IV to oral switch. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Any age
- Conditions the study is for
- IV Oral Switch, Appropriateness Review
- What is being tested?
- Screening medical record
- Type of treatment
- Injection or infusion
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 8,000 participants
- Where
- 1 siteBelgium
- Study dates
- Aug 2015to Aug 2016
- 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 Any age
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Therapy with prescriptions for levofloxacin (J01MA12), moxifloxacin (J01MA14), clarithromycin (J01FA09), fluconazole (J02AC01), clindamycin (J01FF01), acetaminophen (N02BE01), rifampicin (J04AB02), ornidazole (J01XD03) and metronidazole (J01XD01) in the hospitals CPOE from 01-08-2015 until 30-11-2015 for hospitalized patients.
Who cannot join
- Therapy prescribed in PDMS (in casu: ICU)
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Comparison of Cost-effectiveness Between Electronic Notes Versus Telephone Calls to Alert the Prescriber of a Possible IV to Oral Switch.
The goal of this study compare the effectiveness of an electronic note versus a telephone call to alert the prescriber of a possible IV to oral switch. Secondary endpoints are the time-to-switch and the economic impact of earlier IV to oral switch.
Read the detailed description
Methods
- Study design
A prospective, mono-centric, interrupted time series interventional study will be carried out starting in August 2015. Patients will be recruited hospital wide, except for patients admitted at the ICU or pediatric wards. The study protocol will be send for approval to the Clinical Trial Centre and Ethics Committee. Based on the NIH, Code of Federal Regulations Chapter 45-46, an exemption on informed consent is requested at Ethics Committee in order to prevent bias by informing physicians and/or patients; as there's only a suggestion to alter therapy to the treating physician and no clinical intervention is planned and data are processed anonymously and retrospectively, patient safety and patient rights are guaranteed. The study protocol will be registered in the public registry ClinicalTrials.gov.
- Inclusion and exclusion criteria and general assessment process
All prescriptions for levofloxacin (J01MA12), moxifloxacin (J01MA14), clarithromycin (J01FA09), fluconazole (J02AC01), clindamycin (J01FF01), acetaminophen (N02BE01), rifampicin (J04AB02), ornidazole (J01XD03) and metronidazole (J01XD01) in the hospitals CPOE from 01-08-2015 until 30-11-2015 for all hospitalized patients will be included.
The following prescription-related information will be requested from the HIS: unique hospitalisation number, patient name (needed for contact with prescriber), date of prescription, identification of prescriber, ward number, discipline, medication, route of administration, dose.
The sample size of the dataset is not limited in order to provide the maximum power to the study. The number of patients is estimated at 4000 per month.
- Building the dataset
A daily stored query, as presented in Figure 1, will the CPOE for therapies with at least one of the nine bio-equivalent drugs and fulfillment of the other criteria, such as presence of an order of a meal or prescription for other oral solid drugs and absence of a prescription of parenteral nutrition or an order for enteral feeding . The working procedure and the stored query are validated by 3 senior staff hospital pharmacists with expertise in the domain and approved by the Pharmacy\&Therapeutics Committee (MFC).
The time scheme of the study is presented in Figure 2, and consists of the following blocks:
- Baseline monitoring periods: During month 1 and 3, the query will be run without intervention. The results of the query are captured in a database in order to have baseline data before starting both the intervention periods.
- Intervention period 1: During month 2, a team of trained staff pharmacists, who are assisted under close supervision by master students of the Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, contact the prescribers by telephone, guided by the suggestions and information of the operating procedure. The number of contacted prescribers and their responses (acceptance or not) are recorded in the database. To do so, a standard operating procedure for telephone contact with the prescribers will be available for the co-investigators.
- Intervention period 2: During month 4, a computer algorithm will leave an electronic follow-up note suggesting the potential IV to oral switch, along with the argument to do so, in the medical record.
Due to dispensing of the medication and his interdisciplinary task in optimizing therapy the hospital pharmacist is related to the patient and has access to the necessary data; the pharmaceutical record is part of the patients' medical record. Nevertheless the access to the medical records is, as always, subject to approval by the medical council. Use of data is subject to a confidentiality agreement, an official confidentiality agreement between hospital and each co-investigator will be signed.
The solely intend of the access to the medical record is to gather data on the potential IV/PO switch and possible contra-indications. There will be no intervention in any way in the therapy nor the patient - physicians relationship. Reporting will be anonymous, never on an individual patient or physician.
Impact of initiation time of the study At the University Hospitals Leuven, August is the moment where most new prescribers enter the hospital. To avoid bias from this prescriber switch, the switch period is excluded from the timing. Therefore, in concrete, baseline monitoring period 1 will be started up in September 2015.
Avoidance of potential bias To avoid learning bias from the prescribers, a wash-out period is included before each intervention period. A poster on possible IV-PO switch will distributed in the hospital and published on the intranet webpage at the start of each period of the study.
- Analysis of database
General analysis of the database will be done in Microsoft Access 2013. More in detail, descriptive statistics will be carried out using appropriate parametric or non- parametric tests (Student t-test, Mann-Whitney U-test or Chi square, based on distribution of data) to describe the demographics of the included patients.
Statistical analysis will be carried out in SPSS or SAS by the investigator in collaboration with L-Biostat (KU Leuven).
- Pharmacoeconomic analysis
Based on the dataset (time-to-switch and price of medication) the potential cost-saving from a healthcare payer perspective will be calculated using the list price at 01-11-2015 of the involved medication. Cost-avoidance due to lesser infections or lesser length of stay cannot be calculated with this dataset.
- Conditions
- IV Oral Switch, Appropriateness Review
- Being tested
- Screening medical record
- Keywords
- bioequivalent, IV/PO switch, appropriateness, clinical pharmacy
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Screening medical recordOther
Communicating possible IV/PO switch to prescriber by phone or e-note in medical record
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Screening medical record | Other | Screening medical record for possible IV-PO switch Possbile IV/PO switch communicated to prescriber by phone or e-note Receives: Other: Screening medical record |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Effectiveness of the type of alert
Difference in number of switches and time to swich between electronic note and telephone alert of the prescriber.
Measured: 4 months - August till November 2015 - calculated after each from 4 periods (=months)
Secondary outcomes (4)
The number of possible IV/PO switches, per discipline and per type of product
number of potential IV to oral switches
Measured: 4 months - August till November 2015 - calculated after each from 4 periods (=months)
Pharmacoeconomic impact of the intervention on time to switch
Cost saving of switching to less expensive oral medication and cost saving due to lesser adverse events in relation to the cost of running the IV/oral switch service. Delta time to switch multiplied by days of inapproriate IV therapy --> savings in euro
Measured: 4 months - August till November 2015 - calculated after each from 4 periods (=months)
Evidence and motivation for overruling the switch
Reasons and evidence background of the reasons for not following the advice to switch. descriptive.
Measured: 4 months - August till November 2015 - calculated after each from 4 periods (=months)
Learning curve over time and this for both methods of alerting on possible IV/PO switches
Can there be a bias from a learning effect. Measured as time to switch in control and washout periods.
Measured: 4 months - August till November 2015 - calculated after each from 4 periods (=months)
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted18 Aug 2017
- Study startAug 2015
- Primary completionAug 2016
- Study completionAug 2016
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for IV Oral SwitchStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Universitaire Ziekenhuizen KU LeuvenThe 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
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 8,000 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Universitaire Ziekenhuizen KU Leuven
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- KU Leuven
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Thomas De Rijdt, Universitaire Ziekenhuizen KU Leuven
- Investigators
- Thomas De Rijdt, PharmD, Principal investigator, UZ Leuven
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03254407
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- S58200
- Acronym
- STORM
- Status last verified
- Aug 2017
- First submitted
- 1 May 2017
- Last updated
- 18 Aug 2017
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 18 Aug 2017. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Comparison of Cost-effectiveness Between Electronic Notes Versus Telephone Calls to Alert the Prescriber of a Possible IV to Oral Switch.
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03254407
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- STORM / S58200
- Conditions
- IV Oral Switch, Appropriateness Review
- Keywords
- bioequivalent, IV/PO switch, appropriateness, clinical pharmacy
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 8,000 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Universitaire Ziekenhuizen KU LeuvenUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- KU Leuven
- Study start
- Aug 2015
- Primary completion
- Aug 2016 (actual)
- Study completion
- Aug 2016 (actual)
- First posted
- 18 Aug 2017 (actual)
- 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.
The goal of this study compare the effectiveness of an electronic note versus a telephone call to alert the prescriber of a possible IV to oral switch. Secondary endpoints are the time-to-switch and the economic impact of earlier IV to oral switch.
Detailed description
Methods
- Study design
A prospective, mono-centric, interrupted time series interventional study will be carried out starting in August 2015. Patients will be recruited hospital wide, except for patients admitted at the ICU or pediatric wards. The study protocol will be send for approval to the Clinical Trial Centre and Ethics Committee. Based on the NIH, Code of Federal Regulations Chapter 45-46, an exemption on informed consent is requested at Ethics Committee in order to prevent bias by informing physicians and/or patients; as there's only a suggestion to alter therapy to the treating physician and no clinical intervention is planned and data are processed anonymously and retrospectively, patient safety and patient rights are guaranteed. The study protocol will be registered in the public registry ClinicalTrials.gov.
- Inclusion and exclusion criteria and general assessment process
All prescriptions for levofloxacin (J01MA12), moxifloxacin (J01MA14), clarithromycin (J01FA09), fluconazole (J02AC01), clindamycin (J01FF01), acetaminophen (N02BE01), rifampicin (J04AB02), ornidazole (J01XD03) and metronidazole (J01XD01) in the hospitals CPOE from 01-08-2015 until 30-11-2015 for all hospitalized patients will be included.
The following prescription-related information will be requested from the HIS: unique hospitalisation number, patient name (needed for contact with prescriber), date of prescription, identification of prescriber, ward number, discipline, medication, route of administration, dose.
The sample size of the dataset is not limited in order to provide the maximum power to the study. The number of patients is estimated at 4000 per month.
- Building the dataset
A daily stored query, as presented in Figure 1, will the CPOE for therapies with at least one of the nine bio-equivalent drugs and fulfillment of the other criteria, such as presence of an order of a meal or prescription for other oral solid drugs and absence of a prescription of parenteral nutrition or an order for enteral feeding . The working procedure and the stored query are validated by 3 senior staff hospital pharmacists with expertise in the domain and approved by the Pharmacy\&Therapeutics Committee (MFC).
The time scheme of the study is presented in Figure 2, and consists of the following blocks:
- Baseline monitoring periods: During month 1 and 3, the query will be run without intervention. The results of the query are captured in a database in order to have baseline data before starting both the intervention periods.
- Intervention period 1: During month 2, a team of trained staff pharmacists, who are assisted under close supervision by master students of the Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, contact the prescribers by telephone, guided by the suggestions and information of the operating procedure. The number of contacted prescribers and their responses (acceptance or not) are recorded in the database. To do so, a standard operating procedure for telephone contact with the prescribers will be available for the co-investigators.
- Intervention period 2: During month 4, a computer algorithm will leave an electronic follow-up note suggesting the potential IV to oral switch, along with the argument to do so, in the medical record.
Due to dispensing of the medication and his interdisciplinary task in optimizing therapy the hospital pharmacist is related to the patient and has access to the necessary data; the pharmaceutical record is part of the patients' medical record. Nevertheless the access to the medical records is, as always, subject to approval by the medical council. Use of data is subject to a confidentiality agreement, an official confidentiality agreement between hospital and each co-investigator will be signed.
The solely intend of the access to the medical record is to gather data on the potential IV/PO switch and possible contra-indications. There will be no intervention in any way in the therapy nor the patient - physicians relationship. Reporting will be anonymous, never on an individual patient or physician.
Impact of initiation time of the study At the University Hospitals Leuven, August is the moment where most new prescribers enter the hospital. To avoid bias from this prescriber switch, the switch period is excluded from the timing. Therefore, in concrete, baseline monitoring period 1 will be started up in September 2015.
Avoidance of potential bias To avoid learning bias from the prescribers, a wash-out period is included before each intervention period. A poster on possible IV-PO switch will distributed in the hospital and published on the intranet webpage at the start of each period of the study.
- Analysis of database
General analysis of the database will be done in Microsoft Access 2013. More in detail, descriptive statistics will be carried out using appropriate parametric or non- parametric tests (Student t-test, Mann-Whitney U-test or Chi square, based on distribution of data) to describe the demographics of the included patients.
Statistical analysis will be carried out in SPSS or SAS by the investigator in collaboration with L-Biostat (KU Leuven).
- Pharmacoeconomic analysis
Based on the dataset (time-to-switch and price of medication) the potential cost-saving from a healthcare payer perspective will be calculated using the list price at 01-11-2015 of the involved medication. Cost-avoidance due to lesser infections or lesser length of stay cannot be calculated with this dataset.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 1
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Screening medical record | Other | Other: Screening medical recordScreening medical record for possible IV-PO switch Possbile IV/PO switch communicated to prescriber by phone or e-note |
Who may qualify
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Therapy with prescriptions for levofloxacin (J01MA12), moxifloxacin (J01MA14), clarithromycin (J01FA09), fluconazole (J02AC01), clindamycin (J01FF01), acetaminophen (N02BE01), rifampicin (J04AB02), ornidazole (J01XD03) and metronidazole (J01XD01) in the hospitals CPOE from 01-08-2015 until 30-11-2015 for hospitalized patients.
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Therapy prescribed in PDMS (in casu: ICU)
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Screening medical recordCommunicating possible IV/PO switch to prescriber by phone or e-note in medical record | Other | Screening medical record |
Primary outcome
Effectiveness of the type of alert
Time frame: 4 months - August till November 2015 - calculated after each from 4 periods (=months)
Difference in number of switches and time to swich between electronic note and telephone alert of the prescriber.
4 secondary outcomes
The number of possible IV/PO switches, per discipline and per type of product
Time frame: 4 months - August till November 2015 - calculated after each from 4 periods (=months)
Pharmacoeconomic impact of the intervention on time to switch
Time frame: 4 months - August till November 2015 - calculated after each from 4 periods (=months)
Evidence and motivation for overruling the switch
Time frame: 4 months - August till November 2015 - calculated after each from 4 periods (=months)
Learning curve over time and this for both methods of alerting on possible IV/PO switches
Time frame: 4 months - August till November 2015 - calculated after each from 4 periods (=months)
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 18 Aug 2017.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for IV Oral Switch
RecruitingPhase 4
Oral Switch in Pediatric Bloodstream Infections
Bloodstream Infection, Bacteremia Sepsis
RecruitingObservational study
Promoting Optimal Treatment Choices in Neonates With Suspected Early-Onset Sepsis
Early-onset Sepsis
Not yet recruitingEarly Phase 1
DOAC or VKA in Patients With AF and Stroke While on DOAC - a Pilot Trial
Atrial Fibrillation (AF), Stroke (in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation)
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.
Thomas De Rijdt, PharmD principal investigator
UZ Leuven
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Screening medical record in people with IV Oral Switch and Appropriateness Review, run by Universitaire Ziekenhuizen KU Leuven at 1 site in Belgium.
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 1 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 18 Aug 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 Belgium. 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?
Effectiveness of the type of alert (time frame: 4 months - August till November 2015 - calculated after each from 4 periods (=months)). 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 18 Aug 2017.