Postoperative Pulmonary ComplicationsPrECiSIOnNCT06916598
Consensus Statements on Definition, Components and Grading of Postoperative Pulmonary Complications
An observational study of Postoperative Pulmonary Complications, run by Academisch Medisch Centrum - Universiteit van Amsterdam (AMC-UvA) at 1 site in United Kingdom.
Trial summary
An international team of experts is working on a project called PrECiSIOn to develop a clear, consistent definition of PPCs. The goals of this study are to: Define postoperative pulmonary complications in a way that makes sense for patients, families, and healthcare providers. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Postoperative Pulmonary Complications
- What is being tested?
- Delphi study and Structured Interview
- How many people
- 40 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited Kingdom
- Study dates
- 8 Sep 2025to 28 Feb 2026
- Phase
- Observational
- Are there results?
- Not yet: the study is under way
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
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Study population: To encourage the continued engagement of the panellists and help prevent them from dropping out before completing the full process, at least three personalised email reminders will be sent during each Delphi round, in addition to an effort to establish personal contact. Furthermore, all panellists will be recognised as collaborative authors in the final publication in appreciation of their professional expertise. Should the attrition rate of panellists exceed 20%, a sensitivity analysis will be conducted, considering the plausible worst-case and best-case scenarios, and taking into account the opinions of non-responders.
Who may be able to join
None listed.
Who cannot join
- None
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.
United Kingdom1 site
New Cross Hospital
Wolverhampton, Wolverhampton, WV100QP
About this study
Official title: Consensus Statements on Definition, Components and Grading of Postoperative Pulmonary Complications- an International Delphi Study
An international team of experts is working on a project called PrECiSIOn to develop a clear, consistent definition of PPCs. The goals of this study are to:
- Define postoperative pulmonary complications in a way that makes sense for patients, families, and healthcare providers.
- Rank complications by severity so doctors can focus on the most serious ones first.
- Decide how and when to monitor patients after surgery to catch problems early.
Read the detailed description
Postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) are associated with prolonged hospital stays, increased mortality, and significant clinical and economic burdens. Despite their importance, the definition of PPCs varies across studies, leading to inconsistencies in reported incidence rates and research outcomes. Existing definitions, such as the EPCO criteria, have been developed based on expert opinion but lack systematic consensus-building methods.
To address these limitations, the StEP collaboration conducted a systematic review and Delphi process to refine PPC classifications. However, challenges remain, including the lack of universal definitions, hierarchical ranking of complications, and representation from diverse healthcare settings. Composite outcome measures improve statistical power but may obscure differences in severity and clinical significance among PPC subtypes.
The PrECiSIOn Delphi initiative aims to develop an expert consensus on defining PPCs, grading their severity, and determining standardized monitoring methods. The goal is to create a valid, reliable, and universally accepted patient-centered definition of PPCs that enhances comparability across studies and informs clinical decision-making.
- Conditions
- Postoperative Pulmonary Complications
- Being tested
- Delphi study, Structured Interview
- Keywords
- postoperative pulmonary complications, postoperative complications, postoperative pulmonary atelectasis, postoperative pulmonary care, outcomes assessment, Delphi study
- Medical subject headings
- Postoperative Complications, Pulmonary Atelectasis
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Delphi studyOther
This Delphi study involves multiple iterative rounds until a stable consensus or dissensus is reached on all the statements.
Structured InterviewOther
Structured interviews will be conducted by members of the steering committee and an independent qualitative research expert. A pilot-tested case vignette along with a Likert scale-based questionnaire, will be employed to gather insights regarding the impact and severity of PPCs. The impact of the individual components of PPCs will be evaluated on a 7-point Global Rate of Change (GRC) scale (from "very much worse" to very much better") to calculate the minimal clinical important difference. Patient care representatives will be engaged in anonymous voting on the questionnaire. PPCs' rankings and key themes synthesised from the interviews will be shared with the panel in the second Delphi round, facilitating the integration of patient perspectives into the consensus process.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Delphi Panellists | An international panel of 35-40 panellists from Anesthesiology, Surgery or Intensive Care Medicine and including patient representatives, will be invited to this Delphi study. A concerted effort will be made to include panellists from low- and middle-income countries and both sexes. Receives: Other: Delphi study | |
| Patient and Public involvement | Individuals who have either personally experienced PPCs following surgery within the last 5 years or, primary caregivers of such patients will be recruited as patient care representatives. Receives: Other: Structured Interview |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Generate consensus on the postoperative pulmonary complications construct
A diverse group of panellists worldwide, based on pre-specified qualification criteria, will conduct iterative Delphi rounds to generate consensus on the construct of postoperative pulmonary complications.
Measured: 3-6 months
Secondary outcomes (4)
Generate consensus on the postoperative pulmonary complications definition and components
A diverse group of panellists worldwide, based on pre-specified qualification criteria, will conduct iterative Delphi rounds to generate consensus on the definition and components of postoperative pulmonary complications
Measured: 3-6 months
Generate consensus on the on the timeframe of monitoring for postoperative pulmonary complications
A diverse group of panellists worldwide, based on pre-specified qualification criteria, will conduct iterative Delphi rounds to generate consensus on the timeframe of monitoring for postoperative pulmonary complications
Measured: 3-6 months
Generate consensus on the methods of monitoring of postoperative pulmonary complications
A diverse group of panellists worldwide, based on pre-specified qualification criteria, will conduct iterative Delphi rounds to generate consensus on the methods of monitoring of postoperative pulmonary complications.
Measured: 3-6 months
Generate consensus on weightage grade of individual postoperative pulmonary complications
A diverse group of panellists worldwide, based on pre-specified qualification criteria, will conduct iterative Delphi rounds to generate consensus on weightage grade of individual postoperative pulmonary complications.
Measured: 3-6 months
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted8 Apr 2025
- Study start8 Sep 2025
- Primary completion30 Dec 2025 (estimated)
- Study completion28 Feb 2026 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (10)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Postoperative Pulmonary ComplicationsStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Academisch Medisch Centrum - Universiteit van Amsterdam (AMC-UvA)The 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
- Observational
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Cross-sectional
- Enrolment
- 40 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- University of Wolverhampton, The Royal Wolverhampton Hospitals NHS Trust
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Prof. Dr. Marcus J. Schultz, Academisch Medisch Centrum - Universiteit van Amsterdam (AMC-UvA)
- Investigators
- Marcus Schultz, PhD, Study chair, Academisch Medisch Centrum - Universiteit van Amsterdam (AMC-UvA)
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06916598
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- PrECiSIOn
- Acronym
- PrECiSIOn
- Status last verified
- Apr 2025
- First submitted
- 1 Apr 2025
- Last updated
- 18 Sep 2025
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No: The IPD is available to investigators and can be shared with appropriate requests.
Publications
Myles PS, Grocott MP, Boney O, Moonesinghe SR; COMPAC-StEP Group. Standardizing end points in perioperative trials: towards a core and extended outcome set. Br J Anaesth. 2016 May;116(5):586-9. doi: 10.1093/bja/aew066. No abstract available.
PubMed 27106961Gottlieb M, Caretta-Weyer H, Chan TM, Humphrey-Murto S. Educator's blueprint: A primer on consensus methods in medical education research. AEM Educ Train. 2023 Jul 11;7(4):e10891. doi: 10.1002/aet2.10891. eCollection 2023 Aug.
PubMed 37448627Abbott TEF, Fowler AJ, Pelosi P, Gama de Abreu M, Moller AM, Canet J, Creagh-Brown B, Mythen M, Gin T, Lalu MM, Futier E, Grocott MP, Schultz MJ, Pearse RM; StEP-COMPAC Group. A systematic review and consensus definitions for standardised end-points in perioperative medicine: pulmonary complications. Br J Anaesth. 2018 May;120(5):1066-1079. doi: 10.1016/j.bja.2018.02.007. Epub 2018 Mar 27.
PubMed 29661384Jammer I, Wickboldt N, Sander M, Smith A, Schultz MJ, Pelosi P, Leva B, Rhodes A, Hoeft A, Walder B, Chew MS, Pearse RM; European Society of Anaesthesiology (ESA) and the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM); European Society of Anaesthesiology; European Society of Intensive Care Medicine. Standards for definitions and use of outcome measures for clinical effectiveness research in perioperative medicine: European Perioperative Clinical Outcome (EPCO) definitions: a statement from the ESA-ESICM joint taskforce on perioperative outcome measures. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2015 Feb;32(2):88-105. doi: 10.1097/EJA.0000000000000118.
PubMed 25058504Lusquinhos J, Tavares M, Abelha F. Postoperative Pulmonary Complications and Perioperative Strategies: A Systematic Review. Cureus. 2023 May 9;15(5):e38786. doi: 10.7759/cureus.38786. eCollection 2023 May.
PubMed 37303413Shander A, Fleisher LA, Barie PS, Bigatello LM, Sladen RN, Watson CB. Clinical and economic burden of postoperative pulmonary complications: patient safety summit on definition, risk-reducing interventions, and preventive strategies. Crit Care Med. 2011 Sep;39(9):2163-72. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e31821f0522.
PubMed 21572323Canet J, Sabate S, Mazo V, Gallart L, de Abreu MG, Belda J, Langeron O, Hoeft A, Pelosi P; PERISCOPE group. Development and validation of a score to predict postoperative respiratory failure in a multicentre European cohort: A prospective, observational study. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2015 Jul;32(7):458-70. doi: 10.1097/EJA.0000000000000223.
PubMed 26020123Piccioni F, Langiano N, Bignami E, Guarnieri M, Proto P, D'Andrea R, Mazzoli CA, Riccardi I, Bacuzzi A, Guzzetti L, Rossi I, Scolletta S, Comi D, Benigni A, Pierconti F, Coccia C, Biscari M, Murzilli A, Umari M, Peratoner C, Serra E, Baldinelli F, Accardo R, Diana F, Fasciolo A, Amodio R, Ball L, Greco M, Pelosi P, Della Rocca G; One-Lung Ventilation Investigators Group (Supplementary Appendix S1). One-Lung Ventilation and Postoperative Pulmonary Complications After Major Lung Resection Surgery. A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2023 Dec;37(12):2561-2571. doi: 10.1053/j.jvca.2023.04.029. Epub 2023 Apr 27.
PubMed 37730455Fernandez-Bustamante A, Frendl G, Sprung J, Kor DJ, Subramaniam B, Martinez Ruiz R, Lee JW, Henderson WG, Moss A, Mehdiratta N, Colwell MM, Bartels K, Kolodzie K, Giquel J, Vidal Melo MF. Postoperative Pulmonary Complications, Early Mortality, and Hospital Stay Following Noncardiothoracic Surgery: A Multicenter Study by the Perioperative Research Network Investigators. JAMA Surg. 2017 Feb 1;152(2):157-166. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2016.4065.
PubMed 27829093Nasa P, Yurttas T, Battaglini D, Blot S, Fernandez-Bustamante A, Gama de Abreu M, van Meenen DM, Myatra SN, Serpa Neto A, Oppong R, Paulus F, Renukappa S, Schultz MJ, Slutsky AS, Hemmes SNT; PrECiSIOn-group. Consensus on the definition, components, timeframe and grading of composite outcome of postoperative pulmonary complication-protocol for an international mixed-method consensus study (PrECiSIOn). BMJ Open. 2025 Aug 19;15(8):e103888. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2025-103888.
PubMed 40829816
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 18 Sep 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Consensus Statements on Definition, Components and Grading of Postoperative Pulmonary Complications- an International Delphi Study
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06916598
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- PrECiSIOn / PrECiSIOn
- Conditions
- Postoperative Pulmonary Complications
- Keywords
- postoperative pulmonary complications, postoperative complications, postoperative pulmonary atelectasis, postoperative pulmonary care, outcomes assessment, Delphi study
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Enrolling by invitation
- Enrolment
- 40 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Academisch Medisch Centrum - Universiteit van Amsterdam (AMC-UvA)University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- University of Wolverhampton, The Royal Wolverhampton Hospitals NHS Trust
- Study start
- 8 Sep 2025 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 30 Dec 2025 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 28 Feb 2026 (estimated)
- First posted
- 8 Apr 2025 (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.
An international team of experts is working on a project called PrECiSIOn to develop a clear, consistent definition of PPCs. The goals of this study are to:
- Define postoperative pulmonary complications in a way that makes sense for patients, families, and healthcare providers.
- Rank complications by severity so doctors can focus on the most serious ones first.
- Decide how and when to monitor patients after surgery to catch problems early.
Detailed description
Postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) are associated with prolonged hospital stays, increased mortality, and significant clinical and economic burdens. Despite their importance, the definition of PPCs varies across studies, leading to inconsistencies in reported incidence rates and research outcomes. Existing definitions, such as the EPCO criteria, have been developed based on expert opinion but lack systematic consensus-building methods.
To address these limitations, the StEP collaboration conducted a systematic review and Delphi process to refine PPC classifications. However, challenges remain, including the lack of universal definitions, hierarchical ranking of complications, and representation from diverse healthcare settings. Composite outcome measures improve statistical power but may obscure differences in severity and clinical significance among PPC subtypes.
The PrECiSIOn Delphi initiative aims to develop an expert consensus on defining PPCs, grading their severity, and determining standardized monitoring methods. The goal is to create a valid, reliable, and universally accepted patient-centered definition of PPCs that enhances comparability across studies and informs clinical decision-making.
Study design
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Cross-sectional
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Delphi Panellists | – | Other: Delphi studyAn international panel of 35-40 panellists from Anesthesiology, Surgery or Intensive Care Medicine and including patient representatives, will be invited to this Delphi study. A concerted effort will be made to include panellists from low- and middle-income countries and both sexes. |
| Patient and Public involvement | – | Other: Structured InterviewIndividuals who have either personally experienced PPCs following surgery within the last 5 years or, primary caregivers of such patients will be recruited as patient care representatives. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- To encourage the continued engagement of the panellists and help prevent them from dropping out before completing the full process, at least three personalised email reminders will be sent during each Delphi round, in addition to an effort to establish personal contact. Furthermore, all panellists will be recognised as collaborative authors in the final publication in appreciation of their professional expertise. Should the attrition rate of panellists exceed 20%, a sensitivity analysis will be conducted, considering the plausible worst-case and best-case scenarios, and taking into account the opinions of non-responders.
Key inclusion criteria (0 listed)
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- None
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Delphi studyThis Delphi study involves multiple iterative rounds until a stable consensus or dissensus is reached on all the statements. | Other | Delphi Panellists |
| Structured InterviewStructured interviews will be conducted by members of the steering committee and an independent qualitative research expert. A pilot-tested case vignette along with a Likert scale-based questionnaire, will be employed to gather insights regarding the impact and severity of PPCs. The impact of the individual components of PPCs will be evaluated on a 7-point Global Rate of Change (GRC) scale (from "very much worse" to very much better") to calculate the minimal clinical important difference. Patient care representatives will be engaged in anonymous voting on the questionnaire. PPCs' rankings and key themes synthesised from the interviews will be shared with the panel in the second Delphi round, facilitating the integration of patient perspectives into the consensus process. | Other | Patient and Public involvement |
Primary outcome
Generate consensus on the postoperative pulmonary complications construct
Time frame: 3-6 months
A diverse group of panellists worldwide, based on pre-specified qualification criteria, will conduct iterative Delphi rounds to generate consensus on the construct of postoperative pulmonary complications.
4 secondary outcomes
Generate consensus on the postoperative pulmonary complications definition and components
Time frame: 3-6 months
Generate consensus on the on the timeframe of monitoring for postoperative pulmonary complications
Time frame: 3-6 months
Generate consensus on the methods of monitoring of postoperative pulmonary complications
Time frame: 3-6 months
Generate consensus on weightage grade of individual postoperative pulmonary complications
Time frame: 3-6 months
Results and safety
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 18 Sep 2025.
- Background: PubMed 27106961Myles PS, Grocott MP, Boney O, Moonesinghe SR; COMPAC-StEP Group. Standardizing end points in perioperative trials: towards a core and extended outcome set. Br J Anaesth. 2016 May;116(5):586-9. doi: 10.1093/bja/aew066. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 37448627Gottlieb M, Caretta-Weyer H, Chan TM, Humphrey-Murto S. Educator's blueprint: A primer on consensus methods in medical education research. AEM Educ Train. 2023 Jul 11;7(4):e10891. doi: 10.1002/aet2.10891. eCollection 2023 Aug.
- Background: PubMed 29661384Abbott TEF, Fowler AJ, Pelosi P, Gama de Abreu M, Moller AM, Canet J, Creagh-Brown B, Mythen M, Gin T, Lalu MM, Futier E, Grocott MP, Schultz MJ, Pearse RM; StEP-COMPAC Group. A systematic review and consensus definitions for standardised end-points in perioperative medicine: pulmonary complications. Br J Anaesth. 2018 May;120(5):1066-1079. doi: 10.1016/j.bja.2018.02.007. Epub 2018 Mar 27.
- Background: PubMed 25058504Jammer I, Wickboldt N, Sander M, Smith A, Schultz MJ, Pelosi P, Leva B, Rhodes A, Hoeft A, Walder B, Chew MS, Pearse RM; European Society of Anaesthesiology (ESA) and the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM); European Society of Anaesthesiology; European Society of Intensive Care Medicine. Standards for definitions and use of outcome measures for clinical effectiveness research in perioperative medicine: European Perioperative Clinical Outcome (EPCO) definitions: a statement from the ESA-ESICM joint taskforce on perioperative outcome measures. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2015 Feb;32(2):88-105. doi: 10.1097/EJA.0000000000000118.
- Background: PubMed 37303413Lusquinhos J, Tavares M, Abelha F. Postoperative Pulmonary Complications and Perioperative Strategies: A Systematic Review. Cureus. 2023 May 9;15(5):e38786. doi: 10.7759/cureus.38786. eCollection 2023 May.
- Background: PubMed 21572323Shander A, Fleisher LA, Barie PS, Bigatello LM, Sladen RN, Watson CB. Clinical and economic burden of postoperative pulmonary complications: patient safety summit on definition, risk-reducing interventions, and preventive strategies. Crit Care Med. 2011 Sep;39(9):2163-72. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e31821f0522.
- Background: PubMed 26020123Canet J, Sabate S, Mazo V, Gallart L, de Abreu MG, Belda J, Langeron O, Hoeft A, Pelosi P; PERISCOPE group. Development and validation of a score to predict postoperative respiratory failure in a multicentre European cohort: A prospective, observational study. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2015 Jul;32(7):458-70. doi: 10.1097/EJA.0000000000000223.
- Background: PubMed 37730455Piccioni F, Langiano N, Bignami E, Guarnieri M, Proto P, D'Andrea R, Mazzoli CA, Riccardi I, Bacuzzi A, Guzzetti L, Rossi I, Scolletta S, Comi D, Benigni A, Pierconti F, Coccia C, Biscari M, Murzilli A, Umari M, Peratoner C, Serra E, Baldinelli F, Accardo R, Diana F, Fasciolo A, Amodio R, Ball L, Greco M, Pelosi P, Della Rocca G; One-Lung Ventilation Investigators Group (Supplementary Appendix S1). One-Lung Ventilation and Postoperative Pulmonary Complications After Major Lung Resection Surgery. A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2023 Dec;37(12):2561-2571. doi: 10.1053/j.jvca.2023.04.029. Epub 2023 Apr 27.
- Background: PubMed 27829093Fernandez-Bustamante A, Frendl G, Sprung J, Kor DJ, Subramaniam B, Martinez Ruiz R, Lee JW, Henderson WG, Moss A, Mehdiratta N, Colwell MM, Bartels K, Kolodzie K, Giquel J, Vidal Melo MF. Postoperative Pulmonary Complications, Early Mortality, and Hospital Stay Following Noncardiothoracic Surgery: A Multicenter Study by the Perioperative Research Network Investigators. JAMA Surg. 2017 Feb 1;152(2):157-166. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2016.4065.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 40829816Nasa P, Yurttas T, Battaglini D, Blot S, Fernandez-Bustamante A, Gama de Abreu M, van Meenen DM, Myatra SN, Serpa Neto A, Oppong R, Paulus F, Renukappa S, Schultz MJ, Slutsky AS, Hemmes SNT; PrECiSIOn-group. Consensus on the definition, components, timeframe and grading of composite outcome of postoperative pulmonary complication-protocol for an international mixed-method consensus study (PrECiSIOn). BMJ Open. 2025 Aug 19;15(8):e103888. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2025-103888.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No. The IPD is available to investigators and can be shared with appropriate requests.
Related trials for Postoperative Pulmonary Complications
Not yet recruiting
Individualized Inspired Oxygen Fraction Titration During Lung Surgery (iOXY-LUNG)
Postoperative Complications
Active, not recruitingObservational study
The Effect of Single Lung Ventilation Duration and Intraoperative Brain Oxygenation on Cognitive Function and Postoperative Pain in Geriatric Patients
Thoracic Anesthesia, Geriatric Anesthesia
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Diaphragm Ultrasound and Neuromuscular Monitoring for Predicting Early Respiratory Events After Extubation
Residual Neuromuscular Blockade, Diaphragm Dysfunction
Recruiting
Uncovering the Mechanism of Pain Relief by Peripheral Transcutaneous Magnetic Stimulation
Post-Surgical Pain, Chronic, Post-traumatic Pain, Chronic
Not yet recruiting
Low-Dose Norepinephrine With Conservative Fluid Therapy in Hepatobiliary Surgery
Postoperative Complications, Pulmonary Complication
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.
Marcus Schultz, PhD study chair
Academisch Medisch Centrum - Universiteit van Amsterdam (AMC-UvA)
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Postoperative Pulmonary Complications, run by Academisch Medisch Centrum - Universiteit van Amsterdam (AMC-UvA) at 1 site in United Kingdom.
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 0 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: enrolling by invitation, as of the sponsor's last update on 18 Sep 2025. 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 Kingdom. 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?
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
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?
Generate consensus on the postoperative pulmonary complications construct (time frame: 3-6 months). 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 NCT06916598, which also lists 10 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 18 Sep 2025.