The SQUEEZE pilot trial: a trial to determine whether septic shock reversal is quicker in pediatric patients randomized to an early goal directed fluid-sparing strategy vs. usual care
Parker, M. J.; Choong, K.; Fox-Robichaud, A.; Liaw, P. C.; Thabane, L.; Canadian Critical Care Trials Group, ; Canadian Critical Care Translational Biology Group,
Show abstract
ObjectiveThe overall objective of our research is to determine in children with septic shock whether use of a fluid-sparing strategy results in improved clinical outcomes without an increased risk of adverse events compared to usual care. The specific objective of this pilot randomized controlled trial was to evaluate the feasibility of a definitive multicenter trial to answer our research question. DesignPragmatic, 2-arm, parallel group, open label, prospective pilot randomized controlled trial including a nested biosample-based translational study. SettingPediatric tertiary care centre PatientsChildren aged 29 days to <18 years of age presenting to the Emergency Department or admitted to an in-patient ward (including the PICU) with suspected or confirmed septic shock and a need for ongoing resuscitation. InterventionsFluid-sparing vs. usual care resuscitation strategy continued until shock reversal. The fluid-sparing intervention comprised instructions to restrict fluid bolus therapy in conjunction with early initiation and/or preferential use of vasoactive medication support as a strategy to spare fluid while targeting the hemodynamic goals specified in the American College of Critical Care Medicine Surviving Sepsis Guidelines. The usual care strategy did not limit use of fluid bolus therapy. Measurements and Main Results53 were randomized to usual care (n=27) or fluid-sparing (n=26). Fifty-one participants were available for primary outcome analysis. Primary feasibility outcomes related to participant enrolment and protocol adherence. Enrolment rate was 1.8 (51/29); 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.3-2.3 participants/month. Study procedures were implemented in 49/51 (96.1%), 95% CI: 86.5-99.5% participants within 1 hour of randomization in a median (quartile range [IQR]) of 8 (5, 15) minutes. The protocol required use of an exception to consent process and consent for ongoing participation was 48/51 (94.1%), 95% CI: 83.8-98.8%. There were no serious adverse events. ConclusionsWe concluded the large multicenter SQUEEZE Trial feasible to conduct. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov [NCT01973907]
Matching journals
The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Helmet noninvasive ventilation for COVID-19 patients (Helmet-COVID): study protocol for a multicenter randomized controlled trial 94%
- The COVID-19 Critical Care Consortium observational study: Design and rationale of a prospective, international, multicenter, observational study 94%
- Criteria to Achieve Safe Antimicrobial Intravenous-to-Oral Switch in Hospitalised Adult Populations: A Systematic Rapid Review 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Randomised, controlled, feasibility trial comparing vasopressor infusion administered via peripheral cannula versus central venous catheter for critically ill adults: a study protocol 95%
- Doxycycline for the prevention of progression of COVID-19 to severe disease requiring intensive care unit (ICU) admission: a randomized, controlled, open-label, parallel group trial (DOXPREVENT.ICU) 93%
- Hydroxychloroquine For The Treatment Of Severe Respiratory Infection By COVID-19: A Randomized Controlled Trial 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Statistical Analysis Plan for the Stepped-wedge Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial of Electronic Early Notification of Sepsis in Hospitalized Ward Patients (SCREEN): a study protocol for a stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trial 96%
- Electronic early notification of sepsis in hospitalized ward patients: a study protocol for a stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trial 96%
- Decision support system to evaluate VENTilation in the Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (DeVENT study) – Trial Protocol 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Clinical prediction models to diagnose neonatal sepsis in low-income and middle-income countries: a scoping review 93%
- Essential Emergency and Critical Care – a consensus among global clinical experts 92%
- Kangaroo mother care for preterm or low birth weight infants: A systematic review and meta-analysis 91%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.