AzTrials
AzTrials

Sedative Adverse ReactionNCT03420898

Reducing Sedatives in Hospital Study

An observational study of Sedative Adverse Reaction and Sleep, run by Mount Sinai Hospital, Canada at 1 site in Canada.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

Inappropriate prescription of unnecessary and potentially harmful medications continues to be a widespread problem for hospitalized patients. The investigators aim to study the prescription patterns of several classes of medications featured both in the Canadian Choosing Wisely campaign and the Beers Criteria for… Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 years and older
Conditions the study is for
Sedative Adverse Reaction, Sleep
What is being tested?
Quality Improvement Intervention, prescription reduction
How many people
19,090 participants
Where
1 siteCanada
Study dates
19 May 2017to 19 Dec 2019
Phase
Observational
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

Study population: general medical, cardiovascular and surgical patients

Who may be able to join

  • All patients discharged from study unit during study period.

Who cannot join

  • There are no exclusion criteria.

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

Canada1 site
  • Mount Sinai Hospital

    Toronto, Ontario, M5G 1X5

Other trials in Canada

About this study

Official title: Sedative Reduction Among Hospitalized Patients: A Multicentre Quality Improvement Collaboration

Inappropriate prescription of unnecessary and potentially harmful medications continues to be a widespread problem for hospitalized patients. The investigators aim to study the prescription patterns of several classes of medications featured both in the Canadian Choosing Wisely campaign and the Beers Criteria for medication1,2. Specifically, this study will be looking at the patterns of sedatives (includes benzodiazepines, sedative-hypnotics, and sedating antipsychotics) prescriptions over time.

The investigators aim to determine how closely these recommendations are adhered to on medical-surgical wards at five local hospitals (Sinai Health System, Toronto General Hospital, Toronto Western Hospital, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Center, and St. Michael's Hospital); and to observe trends in prescribing before and after hospital-wide quality improvement initiatives.

Read the detailed description

Inappropriate prescription of unnecessary and potentially harmful medications continues to be a widespread problem for hospitalized patients. We aim to study the prescription patterns of several classes of medications featured both in the Canadian Choosing Wisely campaign and the Beers Criteria for medication1,2. Specifically, we will be looking at the patterns of sedatives (includes benzodiazepines, sedative-hypnotics, and sedating antipsychotics) prescriptions over time.

Use of sedatives in community or hospital settings has been shown to range from 50-80%. Extensive study has linked their use and falls, likely due to their negative effect on postural control and cognition3. The odds ratio for falls in elderly patients taking benzodiazepines has been estimated at 1.42 (95% Confidence Interval, 1.20-1.71) and even higher patients over the age of 65 for falls in patients taking a benzodiazepine 4. This association also holds true for hospitalized patients, particularly if first prescribed in hospital5. Similarly, antipsychotics have been shown to increase the risk of CVA (cardiovascular accident) and mortality in elderly patients and are not recommended as first-line therapy for insomnia.1 In addition, sedatives are associated with increased mortality and morbidity such as hip fractures. Sedative prescriptions that originate in hospital are perpetuated after discharge with over 3% of sedative-naïve patients leaving hospital with a new prescription. Half of these patients go on to become chronic users.6 Guidelines now strongly recommend against the use of sedative medication as first-line therapy for insomnia. There is evidence to support a non-pharmacological approach to iatrogenic insomnia in hospital that involves environmental cueing (noise and light reduction, warm beverages at bedtime) and minimizing interruptions.7 We aim to determine how closely these recommendations are adhered to on medical-surgical wards at five local hospitals (Sinai Health System, Toronto General Hospital, Toronto Western Hospital, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Center, and St. Michael's Hospital); and to observe trends in prescribing before and after hospital-wide quality improvement initiatives.

Rationale for this study

Despite recommendations against the regular use of sedatives, these drugs continue to be widely prescribed in the inpatient setting. This study will provide baseline information on the pattern of sedative use on medical-surgical wards. It will also identify changes in prescribing patterns following institutional quality improvement initiatives. Participating hospitals will implement a sedative reduction sleep bundle including the following best practices:

  • nursing, physician and patient education such as information sessions, hand-outs, posters, and email alerts
  • implementation of sleep-friendly environmental changes (e.g., minimize noise and disruptions overnight)
  • monitoring of the impact of environmental changes on patient's sleep through the use of clinical sleep surveys (administered by front-line staff)
  • clinical pharmacists engagement to assist clinical teams in carrying out best-practice with regards to appropriate sedative prescribing
  • revisions of existing order-sets to reflect the appropriate ordering

Potential risks and benefits to participants

There is no potential for physical harm to participants in this study. There is sufficient scientific evidence that guides clinicians away from prescribing sedatives and antipsychotic drugs for insomnia in the hospital setting. In fact, there is potential benefit to welfare in this quality improvement initiative. This is a quality improvement initiative that seeks to implement best practices to reduce avoidable harm to patients. Ethics review is requested at each participating site for access to health records and for the dissemination of results demonstrating the effectiveness of the sedative reduction sleep bundle on reducing sedatives without diminishing sleep quality in hospital.

The risk of release of personal health information is minimal as the data will be de-identified and all standard security measures will be applied. The principal investigator of each site will assign patients with a study number and remove identifying data (exceptions: age and sex) before exporting de-identified data from host hospital. Site PIs will maintain the study identifier key in locked offices on hospital-secure servers. Only the study principal investigator will have access to de-identified patient-level data, which will be reported as aggregate data. Data sharing agreements will be completed. Any potential benefit would come in the form of potential improvements to the health care system and safer future prescribing practices.

Patient population to be studied

The study population will be any patient admitted to medical-surgical units.

Being tested
Quality Improvement Intervention, prescription reduction

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • Quality Improvement Intervention, prescription reductionOther

    The intervention is a quality improvement education aimed at reducing sedative prescriptions and implementing safe sleep environments.

Study groups in NCT03420898
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
1General Medicine in Hospital Unit 70 Bed. Quality Improvement Intervention, prescription reduction The intervention is a quality improvement education aimed at reducing sedative prescriptions and implementing safe sleep environments.
Receives: Other: Quality Improvement Intervention, prescription reduction
2General Medicine in Hospital 38 Bed Unit. Quality Improvement Intervention, prescription reduction The intervention is a quality improvement education aimed at reducing sedative prescriptions and implementing safe sleep environments.
Receives: Other: Quality Improvement Intervention, prescription reduction
3Cardiovascular Surgery in Hospital Unit 36 bed. Quality Improvement Intervention, prescription reduction The intervention is a quality improvement education aimed at reducing sedative prescriptions and implementing safe sleep environments.
Receives: Other: Quality Improvement Intervention, prescription reduction
4General Surgery in Hospital 24 bed Unit. Quality Improvement Intervention, prescription reduction The intervention is a quality improvement education aimed at reducing sedative prescriptions and implementing safe sleep environments.
Receives: Other: Quality Improvement Intervention, prescription reduction
5Cardiac 36-bed in Hospital Unit. Quality Improvement Intervention, prescription reduction The intervention is a quality improvement education aimed at reducing sedative prescriptions and implementing safe sleep environments.
Receives: Other: Quality Improvement Intervention, prescription reduction
6General Medicine 26 Bed in Hospital Unit. Quality Improvement Intervention, prescription reduction The intervention is a quality improvement education aimed at reducing sedative prescriptions and implementing safe sleep environments.
Receives: Other: Quality Improvement Intervention, prescription reduction

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Rates of sedatives prescribed

    The primary goal of the study is to determine the rate and trend of inappropriate sedative use and prescription among medical-surgical inpatients over time.

    Measured: 27 months

Secondary outcomes (1)
  1. Length of Stay

    The secondary outcome of this study is to measure the length of stay of patients in hospital.

    Measured: 27 months

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted5 Feb 2018
  2. Study start19 May 2017
  3. Primary completion19 Dec 2019
  4. Study completion19 Dec 2019

Resources

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
Prospective
Enrolment
19,090 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT03420898
Sponsor's protocol ID
MSH-Canada-Sedation
Status last verified
Feb 2020
First submitted
29 Jan 2018
Last updated
20 Feb 2020
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
Individual data sharing
Undecided

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

An observational study of Sedative Adverse Reaction and Sleep, run by Mount Sinai Hospital, Canada at 1 site in Canada.

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 20 Feb 2020. 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 Canada. 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?

Rates of sedatives prescribed (time frame: 27 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 20 Feb 2020; AzTrials last refreshed its copy on 28 Oct 2026.

Free account

Keep searching with a free account

You’ve used your 3 free searches for this session. Log in or create a free AzTrials account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in