Acute Ischemic Stroke Patients Receiving Reperfusion TherapyNCT03734640
Optimal Post Tpa-Iv Monitoring in Ischemic Stroke
A study testing Low-intensity monitoring strategy and Guideline recommended standard monitoring in people with Acute Ischemic Stroke Patients Receiving Reperfusion Therapy, run by Craig Anderson at 54 sites in 7 countries.
Trial summary
OPTIMISTmain is an investigator-initiated and conducted, international, multicentre, stepped wedge cluster randomized controlled trial comparing the effects of different intensities of nursing care monitoring for patients with acute ischemic stroke of mild severity and without critical care needs after IV-tPA. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Acute Ischemic Stroke Patients Receiving Reperfusion Therapy
- What is being tested?
- Low-intensity monitoring strategy and Guideline recommended standard monitoring
- Could I receive a placebo?
- Yes, some participants may receive a placebo
- How many people
- 4,922 participants
- Where
- 54 sitesin 7 countries
- Study dates
- 28 Apr 2021to 23 Jan 2025
- 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
- adults (age ≥18 years);
- have received IV alteplase for AIS according to standard criteria;
- have a mild-moderate level of neurological impairment (e.g. score <10 on the NIHSS);
- stable and without any critical care needs at the end of the infusion of alteplase.
Who cannot join
- major neurological impairment;
- definite clinical contraindication or indication to either low-intensity or standard neurological monitoring.
Trial locations and contacts
54 sites in 7 countries.
54 sites in 7 countries
United States20 sites
Lehigh Valley Health Network
Allentown, Pennsylvania, 18103
ThedaCare Regional Medical Center Appleton
Appleton, Wisconsin, 54911
University of Maryland Medical Center
Baltimore, Maryland, 21201
The John Hopkins Hospital
Baltimore, Maryland, 21287
SSM Health DePaul Hospital
Bridgeton, Missouri, 63044
Howard County General Hospital
Columbia, Maryland, 21044
OhioHealth Research Institute - Riverside Methodist Hospital
Columbus, Ohio, 43214
Henry Ford Health System
Detroit, Michigan, 48202
Inova Fairfax Hospital
Falls Church, Virginia, 22042
Cone Health
Greensboro, North Carolina, 27401
Penn State Health
Hershey, Pennsylvania, 17033
Saint Luke's Hospital of Kansas City
Kansas City, Missouri, 64111
Research Medical Center
Kansas City, Missouri, 64132
Centura St. Anthony Hospital
Lakewood, Colorado, 80228
Centura Littleton Adventist Hospital
Littleton, Colorado, 80122
Ascension Providence Hospital
Novi, Michigan, 48374
INTEGRIS Southwest Medical Center
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, 73109
Renown Health
Reno, Nevada, 89502
University of Rochester Medical Center
Rochester, New York, 14642
University of Massachusetts Worcester
Worcester, Massachusetts, 01601
United Kingdom11 sites
Addenbrookes Hospital
Cambridge, CB2 0QQ
Countess of Chester Hospital
Chester, CH2 1UL
Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital
Exeter, EX2 5DW
Leicester Royal Infirmary
London, LE1 5WW
University College London Hospitals
London, NW1 2PG
Kings College Hospital
London, SE5 9RS
St George's University Hospitals
London, SW17 0QT
Luton and Dunstable University Hospital
Luton, LU4 0DZ
Nottingham University Hospitals
Nottingham, NG5 1PB
Warnford Hospital
Oxford, OX3 9DU
Peterborough City Hospital
Peterborough, PE3 9GZ
Australia9 sites
Princess Alexandra Hospital
Brisbane, Queensland, 4102
Canberra Hospital
Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, 2065
Concord Hospital
Concord, New South Wales, 2139
Nepean Hospital
Kingswood, New South Wales, 2747
St George Public Hospital
Kogarah, New South Wales, 2217
Fiona Stanley Hospital
Murdoch, Western Australia, 6150
Prince of Wales Hospital
Randwick, New South Wales, 2031
Royal North Shore Hospital
Sydney, New South Wales, 2050
Royal Prince Alfred Hospital
Sydney, New South Wales, 2050
Chile8 sites
Hospital Base de Osorno
Osorno, 5290000
Hospital de Puerto Montt
Port Montt, Los Lagos Region
Clinica Alemana de Santiago
Santiago, Santiago Metropolitan
Hospital del Pino
Santiago, Santiago Metropolitan
Hospital La Florida Dra. Eloisa Díaz
Santiago, Santiago Metropolitan
Hospital Padre Hurtado
Santiago, Santiago Metropolitan
Hospital Sótero del Rio
Santiago, Santiago Metropolitan
Hospital Carlos Van Buren
Valparaíso, 2352499
Malaysia3 sites
Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia
Kota Bharu, 16150
Universiti Kebangssan Malaysia Medical Center
Kuala Lumpur, 56000
Hospital Pengajar Universiti Putra Malaysia (Hpupm)
Serdang, 43400
Mexico2 sites
Instituto Nacional de Neurología y Neurocirugía Manuel Velasco Suarez
Mexico City
Hospital Regional ISSSTE de Puebla
Puebla City
About this study
OPTIMISTmain is an investigator-initiated and conducted, international, multicentre, stepped wedge cluster randomized controlled trial comparing the effects of different intensities of nursing care monitoring for patients with acute ischemic stroke of mild severity and without critical care needs after IV-tPA.
Read the detailed description
Research question: Patients receiving thrombolytic therapy (tissue plasminogen activator [tPA]) for acute ischaemic stroke (AIS), have been monitored with a high intensity schedule of vital signs and neurologic assessments, which often requires 1:1 nursing and/or admission in an intensive care unit (ICU) or similar ward for at least 24 hours after receiving tPA. Studies indicate that patients with mild degrees of AIS after tPA do not require such intensive monitoring, yet most stroke services continue to follow a practice recommended in guidelines based on the initial cautious evaluation of tPA in AIS over 20 years ago.
Design: Stepped-wedge cluster randomised design. With 3 groups and 4 phases. All groups starting with standard care and in each subsequent phase, groups I through III will switch to the intervention (low-intensity monitoring).
Study centers: This is a global study. Approximately 157 hospitals ('sites') in Australasia, Europe, South American, and North American regions, who are willing to accept the randomized intervention change and adhere to the protocol, collect a required minimum data set on patients over 7 days in hospital (or discharge or death, if sooner), and record any serious adverse event (SAE) during and at clinical outcome assessed at 90 days of follow-up of patients.
Consent/randomization: Hospitals will be eligible if they are using the proposed low-intensity nursing monitoring strategy. A stepped-wedge cluster randomized design has been chosen to avoid contamination, facilitate hospital-wide implementation, and maximize adherence, as the intervention under investigation is to become usual standard of care. The process of one direction (from control to intervention) is to facilitate the low intensity monitoring protocol being applied in clinical practice. The stepped-wedge design means that all hospitals will be randomly allocated to 3 groups: in phase 1, all hospitals will be observed under standard care 'control' conditions according to guideline recommended monitoring; in phase 2, the first cluster of hospitals (Group I) will start receiving the intervention (low-intensity), and then sequentially, Groups II and III will start receiving the interventional package in phase 3 and 4, respectively, so that by phase 4, all hospitals will have the intervention. Those hospitals in Group I are exposed to the intervention for longest time, and those in Group III, the shortest time.
In each phase, hospitals are to maintain a register of all thrombolyzed AIS patients, and to identify all those eligible for, or excluded from participating in the study. Hospitals are required to manage at minimum target of at least 10 consecutive thrombolyzed AIS patients who fulfill the eligibility criteria (presumed 50% of all thrombolyzed AIS patients) over each 4 month period. The recruitment number will vary from 10 to 30 patients, according to seasonal fluctuation and overall numbers of thrombolyzed AIS patients across hospitals. The target number and time limits for each phase will be pre-determined and agreed to with each hospital, to ensure an orderly completion of the study.
On average, for Group I, the time for initiation of the low-intensive intervention is 4 months after activation into phase 1 of the study; for Groups II and III, the time periods for initiation of the low-intensive intervention are 6 and 9 months, after activation, respectively. Data collection will occur at baseline, the first 24 hours, Day 7 (or death or time of hospital discharge, if earlier), and at 90 days (end of follow-up). Patients will be asked to consent to being contacted at some future date to examine long-term outcomes, according to available resources.
A senior executive officer at each center will act as a 'guardian', to provide consent at an institutional level for the intervention to be applied as a 'low risk' intervention to clusters of patients as part of routine care; and written informed consent is to be subsequently obtained from participants, or their approved surrogates, for collection of medical data and participation in the follow-up assessments Randomized allocation of intervention will be assigned by a statistician not otherwise involved in the study according to a statistical program stratified by the country of the site.
Sample size: The sample size required to detect a plausible treatment effect on a clinical outcome in a stepped-wedge trial (3 groups, 4 phases) is 157 hospitals, each recruiting an average of 80 patients (20 per phase), for a total of 12,394 AIS patients. The basis of this calculation is that the study is designed with 90% power (one-sided α = 0.025) to detect non-inferiority (non-inferiority OR margin is 1.25, presumed actual OR is 1.0; the proportion of a bad outcome [mRS 2-6] is 50%) of low-intensity monitoring on the primary outcome. Assuming a stepped-wedge trial of 3 groups and 4 phases, 157 hospitals are required to be randomized into 3 groups of 53 hospitals, each recruiting an average of 16 patients per phase, for a total of 9340 subjects. Assuming 10% with missing primary endpoint data and 5% with nonadherence to randomized treatment, the overall sample size increases to an average of 20 subjects per hospital per phase (i.e. total sample size of 12,394 AIS patients). Allowance will be made to include some very large hospitals (10%, 7) to recruit 50 patients per phase, and smaller hospitals (10%, 7) to recruit 8 patients per phase, in order to allow a broad range of hospitals with variable experience and systems of care for the management of AIS.
- Being tested
- Low-intensity monitoring strategy, Guideline recommended standard monitoring
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Low-intensity monitoring strategyOther
Post-tpa patients will be monitored in a lower intensity with less vital status and neurological assessment
Guideline recommended standard monitoringOther
Post-tpa patients will be monitored in the usual care monitoring environment
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Guideline recommended standard monitoring | Placebo comparator | vital signs (HR, BP) and neurological assessment (GCS and NIHSS) 15-30mins x 2 hours, 30mins x 6 hours, 1hourly x 16 hours in usual care monitoring environment Receives: Other: Guideline recommended standard monitoring |
| Low-intensity monitoring strategy | Active comparator | vital signs (HR, BP) and neurological assessment (GCS and/or NIHSS) 15-30mins x 2 hours, 2hourly x 8 hours, 4hourly x 14 hours in a non-ICU ward Receives: Other: Low-intensity monitoring strategy |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
modified Rankin scale (mRS); shift analysis across full range of scores
Physical function measured according to a 7 level categorical scale, where 0-1 indicates no or minimal symptoms, 2-5 indicates increasing levels of disability/dependencey, and 6=death
Measured: day 90
Secondary outcomes (3)
frequency of major Symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage
intracerebral hemorrhage on brain imaging associated with significant neurological deterioration or death over 24 hours
Measured: day 90
Measures of hospital costs
to allow economic analysis of treatment interventions at a country level
Measured: day 90
any serious adverse event during follow-up
Measured: Within 90 days
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted8 Nov 2018
- Study start28 Apr 2021
- Primary completion1 Dec 2024
- Study completion23 Jan 2025
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (2)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Acute Ischemic Stroke Patients Receiving Reperfusion TherapyStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- 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
- Sequential
- Model description
- stepped wedge cluster randomized
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 4,922 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Craig Anderson
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Genentech, Inc., Johns Hopkins University, The George Institute for Global Health, Australia
- Responsible party
- Sponsor-investigator, Craig Anderson, The George Institute for Global Health, China
- Investigators
- Craig S Anderson, MD PhD, Principal investigator, The George InstituteVictor C Urrutia, MD, Principal investigator, Johns Hopkins University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03734640
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- OPTIMISTmain
- Status last verified
- Mar 2025
- First submitted
- 6 Nov 2018
- Last updated
- 26 Mar 2025
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Yes: 12 months after completion of the study, experienced researchers can seek a copy of the database through requests to the Research Office of The George Institute
Publications
Xu L, Ouyang M, Atkins ER, Summers D, Sui Y, Johnson B, Billot L, Malavera A, Faigle R, Munoz-Venturelli P, Day D, Liu X, Li Q, Song L, Robinson TG, Gonzalez F, Urrutia-Goldsack F, Delcourt C, Nguyen HT, Ton MD, Liu H, Lindley RI, Arauz A, Mercado A, Wan Zaidi WA, Khatri P, Wang X, Urrutia VC, Jan S, Anderson CS. Low-Intensity Monitoring for Mild-to-Moderate Acute Ischemic Stroke Is Cost Saving: Economic Evaluation for OPTIMISTmain. Stroke. 2026 Mar;57(3):587-596. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.125.053506. Epub 2026 Jan 29.
PubMed 41608808Anderson CS, Summers D, Ouyang M, Sui Y, Johnson B, Billot L, Malavera A, Faigle R, Munoz-Venturelli P, Day D, Liu X, Li Q, Song L, Robinson TG, Gonzalez F, Urrutia-Goldsack F, Iacobelli M, Montalbano M, Pruski A, Delcourt C, Durham AC, Ebraimo A, Van Ta HH, Ghosh P, Leonhardt-Caprio A, Nguyen HT, Ton MD, Jan S, Liu H, Lindley RI, Arauz A, Mercado A, Zaidi WAW, Khatri P, Wang X, Urrutia VC; OPTIMISTmain Investigators. Safety and efficacy of low-intensity versus standard monitoring following intravenous thrombolytic treatment in patients with acute ischaemic stroke (OPTIMISTmain): an international, pragmatic, stepped-wedge, cluster-randomised, controlled non-inferiority trial. Lancet. 2025 May 31;405(10493):1909-1922. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(25)00549-5. Epub 2025 May 21.
PubMed 40412428
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 26 Mar 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Optimal Post Tpa-Iv Monitoring in Ischemic Stroke
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03734640
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- OPTIMISTmain
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 4,922 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Craig AndersonUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Genentech, Inc., Johns Hopkins University, The George Institute for Global Health, Australia
- Study start
- 28 Apr 2021 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 1 Dec 2024 (actual)
- Study completion
- 23 Jan 2025 (actual)
- First posted
- 8 Nov 2018 (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.
OPTIMISTmain is an investigator-initiated and conducted, international, multicentre, stepped wedge cluster randomized controlled trial comparing the effects of different intensities of nursing care monitoring for patients with acute ischemic stroke of mild severity and without critical care needs after IV-tPA.
Detailed description
Research question: Patients receiving thrombolytic therapy (tissue plasminogen activator [tPA]) for acute ischaemic stroke (AIS), have been monitored with a high intensity schedule of vital signs and neurologic assessments, which often requires 1:1 nursing and/or admission in an intensive care unit (ICU) or similar ward for at least 24 hours after receiving tPA. Studies indicate that patients with mild degrees of AIS after tPA do not require such intensive monitoring, yet most stroke services continue to follow a practice recommended in guidelines based on the initial cautious evaluation of tPA in AIS over 20 years ago.
Design: Stepped-wedge cluster randomised design. With 3 groups and 4 phases. All groups starting with standard care and in each subsequent phase, groups I through III will switch to the intervention (low-intensity monitoring).
Study centers: This is a global study. Approximately 157 hospitals ('sites') in Australasia, Europe, South American, and North American regions, who are willing to accept the randomized intervention change and adhere to the protocol, collect a required minimum data set on patients over 7 days in hospital (or discharge or death, if sooner), and record any serious adverse event (SAE) during and at clinical outcome assessed at 90 days of follow-up of patients.
Consent/randomization: Hospitals will be eligible if they are using the proposed low-intensity nursing monitoring strategy. A stepped-wedge cluster randomized design has been chosen to avoid contamination, facilitate hospital-wide implementation, and maximize adherence, as the intervention under investigation is to become usual standard of care. The process of one direction (from control to intervention) is to facilitate the low intensity monitoring protocol being applied in clinical practice. The stepped-wedge design means that all hospitals will be randomly allocated to 3 groups: in phase 1, all hospitals will be observed under standard care 'control' conditions according to guideline recommended monitoring; in phase 2, the first cluster of hospitals (Group I) will start receiving the intervention (low-intensity), and then sequentially, Groups II and III will start receiving the interventional package in phase 3 and 4, respectively, so that by phase 4, all hospitals will have the intervention. Those hospitals in Group I are exposed to the intervention for longest time, and those in Group III, the shortest time.
In each phase, hospitals are to maintain a register of all thrombolyzed AIS patients, and to identify all those eligible for, or excluded from participating in the study. Hospitals are required to manage at minimum target of at least 10 consecutive thrombolyzed AIS patients who fulfill the eligibility criteria (presumed 50% of all thrombolyzed AIS patients) over each 4 month period. The recruitment number will vary from 10 to 30 patients, according to seasonal fluctuation and overall numbers of thrombolyzed AIS patients across hospitals. The target number and time limits for each phase will be pre-determined and agreed to with each hospital, to ensure an orderly completion of the study.
On average, for Group I, the time for initiation of the low-intensive intervention is 4 months after activation into phase 1 of the study; for Groups II and III, the time periods for initiation of the low-intensive intervention are 6 and 9 months, after activation, respectively. Data collection will occur at baseline, the first 24 hours, Day 7 (or death or time of hospital discharge, if earlier), and at 90 days (end of follow-up). Patients will be asked to consent to being contacted at some future date to examine long-term outcomes, according to available resources.
A senior executive officer at each center will act as a 'guardian', to provide consent at an institutional level for the intervention to be applied as a 'low risk' intervention to clusters of patients as part of routine care; and written informed consent is to be subsequently obtained from participants, or their approved surrogates, for collection of medical data and participation in the follow-up assessments Randomized allocation of intervention will be assigned by a statistician not otherwise involved in the study according to a statistical program stratified by the country of the site.
Sample size: The sample size required to detect a plausible treatment effect on a clinical outcome in a stepped-wedge trial (3 groups, 4 phases) is 157 hospitals, each recruiting an average of 80 patients (20 per phase), for a total of 12,394 AIS patients. The basis of this calculation is that the study is designed with 90% power (one-sided α = 0.025) to detect non-inferiority (non-inferiority OR margin is 1.25, presumed actual OR is 1.0; the proportion of a bad outcome [mRS 2-6] is 50%) of low-intensity monitoring on the primary outcome. Assuming a stepped-wedge trial of 3 groups and 4 phases, 157 hospitals are required to be randomized into 3 groups of 53 hospitals, each recruiting an average of 16 patients per phase, for a total of 9340 subjects. Assuming 10% with missing primary endpoint data and 5% with nonadherence to randomized treatment, the overall sample size increases to an average of 20 subjects per hospital per phase (i.e. total sample size of 12,394 AIS patients). Allowance will be made to include some very large hospitals (10%, 7) to recruit 50 patients per phase, and smaller hospitals (10%, 7) to recruit 8 patients per phase, in order to allow a broad range of hospitals with variable experience and systems of care for the management of AIS.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Supportive care
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Sequential
- Masking
- Single blind (outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- stepped wedge cluster randomized
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Guideline recommended standard monitoring | Placebo comparator | Other: Guideline recommended standard monitoringvital signs (HR, BP) and neurological assessment (GCS and NIHSS) 15-30mins x 2 hours, 30mins x 6 hours, 1hourly x 16 hours in usual care monitoring environment |
| Low-intensity monitoring strategy | Active comparator | Other: Low-intensity monitoring strategyvital signs (HR, BP) and neurological assessment (GCS and/or NIHSS) 15-30mins x 2 hours, 2hourly x 8 hours, 4hourly x 14 hours in a non-ICU ward |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- adults (age ≥18 years);
- have received IV alteplase for AIS according to standard criteria;
- have a mild-moderate level of neurological impairment (e.g. score <10 on the NIHSS);
- stable and without any critical care needs at the end of the infusion of alteplase.
Key exclusion criteria (2 listed)
- major neurological impairment;
- definite clinical contraindication or indication to either low-intensity or standard neurological monitoring.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Low-intensity monitoring strategyPost-tpa patients will be monitored in a lower intensity with less vital status and neurological assessment | Other | Low-intensity monitoring strategy |
| Guideline recommended standard monitoringPost-tpa patients will be monitored in the usual care monitoring environment | Other | Guideline recommended standard monitoring |
Primary outcome
modified Rankin scale (mRS); shift analysis across full range of scores
Time frame: day 90
Physical function measured according to a 7 level categorical scale, where 0-1 indicates no or minimal symptoms, 2-5 indicates increasing levels of disability/dependencey, and 6=death
3 secondary outcomes
frequency of major Symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage
Time frame: day 90
Measures of hospital costs
Time frame: day 90
any serious adverse event during follow-up
Time frame: Within 90 days
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 26 Mar 2025.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 41608808Xu L, Ouyang M, Atkins ER, Summers D, Sui Y, Johnson B, Billot L, Malavera A, Faigle R, Munoz-Venturelli P, Day D, Liu X, Li Q, Song L, Robinson TG, Gonzalez F, Urrutia-Goldsack F, Delcourt C, Nguyen HT, Ton MD, Liu H, Lindley RI, Arauz A, Mercado A, Wan Zaidi WA, Khatri P, Wang X, Urrutia VC, Jan S, Anderson CS. Low-Intensity Monitoring for Mild-to-Moderate Acute Ischemic Stroke Is Cost Saving: Economic Evaluation for OPTIMISTmain. Stroke. 2026 Mar;57(3):587-596. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.125.053506. Epub 2026 Jan 29.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 40412428Anderson CS, Summers D, Ouyang M, Sui Y, Johnson B, Billot L, Malavera A, Faigle R, Munoz-Venturelli P, Day D, Liu X, Li Q, Song L, Robinson TG, Gonzalez F, Urrutia-Goldsack F, Iacobelli M, Montalbano M, Pruski A, Delcourt C, Durham AC, Ebraimo A, Van Ta HH, Ghosh P, Leonhardt-Caprio A, Nguyen HT, Ton MD, Jan S, Liu H, Lindley RI, Arauz A, Mercado A, Zaidi WAW, Khatri P, Wang X, Urrutia VC; OPTIMISTmain Investigators. Safety and efficacy of low-intensity versus standard monitoring following intravenous thrombolytic treatment in patients with acute ischaemic stroke (OPTIMISTmain): an international, pragmatic, stepped-wedge, cluster-randomised, controlled non-inferiority trial. Lancet. 2025 May 31;405(10493):1909-1922. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(25)00549-5. Epub 2025 May 21.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes. 12 months after completion of the study, experienced researchers can seek a copy of the database through requests to the Research Office of The George Institute
Related trials for Acute Ischemic Stroke Patients Receiving Reperfusion Therapy
Enrolling by invitation
Efficacy and Safety of Human Urinary Kallidinogenase for Acute Ischemic Stroke Patients Receiving Reperfusion Treatment
Acute Ischemic Stroke
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.
Craig S Anderson, MD PhD principal investigator
The George Institute
Victor C Urrutia, MD principal investigator
Johns Hopkins University
54 sites in 7 countries: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Low-intensity monitoring strategy and Guideline recommended standard monitoring in people with Acute Ischemic Stroke Patients Receiving Reperfusion Therapy, run by Craig Anderson at 54 sites in 7 countries.
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 4 inclusion and 2 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 26 Mar 2025. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 54 sites in United States, United Kingdom, Australia, Chile, Malaysia and 2 more countries. 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. Some participants in this study may receive a placebo. 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?
modified Rankin scale (mRS); shift analysis across full range of scores (time frame: day 90). 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 NCT03734640, which also lists 2 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 26 Mar 2025.