AzTrials
AzTrials

Pre-operative AssessmentSGGIPNCT04058769

Software-guided Guideline Implementation in Premedication

A study testing Premedication Guide in people with Pre-operative Assessment and Adults, run by Technical University of Munich at 1 site in Germany.

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

Aim of the project is the development of a software for implementation of anesthesiology guidelines in the preoperative evaluation. The software bases on the 2014 and 2018 guidelines of the European Society of Anesthesiology (ESA) for the pre-operative evaluation of adults undergoing non-cardiac surgery. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 to 100 years
What is being tested?
Premedication Guide
Type of treatment
Medical device
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
203 participants
Where
1 siteGermany
Study dates
1 May 2021to 30 Sep 2022
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 to 100 years
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • age >= 18 years
  • ASA 3 or 4
  • elective surgery
  • written informed consent

Who cannot join

  • emergency surgery
  • patient not being able to give informed consent
  • non-german-speaking patients

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

Germany1 site
  • TU Muenchen

    Munich, 81675

Other trials in Germany

About this study

Official title: Software Development for Anesthesiology Guideline Implementation in the Perioperative Course

Aim of the project is the development of a software for implementation of anesthesiology guidelines in the preoperative evaluation. The software bases on the 2014 and 2018 guidelines of the European Society of Anesthesiology (ESA) for the pre-operative evaluation of adults undergoing non-cardiac surgery.

Traditional premedication is compared with the new software-guided premedication by using a cross-over design. 200 patients are included in the study, 100 of which are first evaluated the traditional way and then with the software, 100 patients are treated the other way round. Results of the two premedication methods are compared according to the primary endpoint "correct approval for OP" and the secondary endpoints number of missed apparative examinations, number of unnecessary apparative examinations, time required for premedication, length of hospital stay, mortality and postoperative complications.

Read the detailed description

Type of study:

Monocentric, prospective cohort study

Procedure for informing and obtaining consent:

Patients who are prepared for surgery in the anesthetic outpatient department or enrolled in the pre-medication list and who meet all inclusion criteria and no exclusion criteria will be identified before the anesthesia consultation. The patients will be informed about the purpose and the course of the study in oral and written form, after which the written consent of the patient will be given before the study-relevant data and examinations are carried out.

Description of the data sources (medical records, questionnaires, etc.):

Data Sources: Patient's medical history, patient history and physical examination, data on standardized Thieme Compliance anesthesia sheets, and existing findings, either external, patient-brought or in-house findings from the SAP. These data are entered into the PDMS. The name of the premedic anesthetist is not relevant for the evaluation and will not be deposited.

Listing / description of the data to be collected:

With the PDMS, all anesthesia-relevant data is collected. These include the history of the patient, current complaints, medication history, physical examination and findings from supplementary equipment examinations. The data of the anonymized control group are extracted exclusively from the PDMS.

Timing (appointments) for the individual study participant:

After the patient has been informed and has consented, after randomization either the premedication as usual with the "old PDMS module" is performed and then a second time with the new software module by another doctor or vice versa, first with the new software and then in the traditional way. This type of cross-over design is done to avoid carry-over effects. The conventional premedicating physician does not know about the patient's participation in the study and makes the decision about the OP release as well as any necessary additional examinations in the usual way and dismisses the patient with the usual pre-hospitalization standard.

The premedication with the new software module is carried out by a doctor who has been trained in it and does not know the result of the first premedication interview. With the help of the new software, the decision on release and possible additional examinations is also made here. The data from the two premedication interviews are stored in xml format in the MRI Data Room and entered in a pseudonymized form in a database. This is done promptly on the day of premedication. A specialist trained in the guidelines, who is blinded to the premedication procedure, compares the results of both premedications. He decides whether the release was correct in both of the above cases or not. If it turns out that the results of both premedications differ and possibly a revision of the premedication document is necessary, unblinding and, if necessary, correction of the premedication document takes place.

Furthermore, the time required for the premedication interview is analyzed as well as the correct arrangement of additional examinations. The secondary outcome parameters are collected using the KIS (clinic information system) and PDMS.

As a comparison population with respect to the secondary endpoints, a conventionally premedicated patient collective, whose anonymized data is extracted from the existing PDMS database, is used in the same period. The endpoint of the comparison is the occurrence of postoperative complications corresponding to a clavia-dindo score of ≥ 3. This corresponds to the events of re-intervention, admission to intensive care unit or death.

Expected end of data collection With hospital discharge, the data collection for the individual patient is completed.

Being tested
Premedication Guide

What participants receive

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

  • Premedication GuideDevice

    Software with guidelines recommendations for preoperative assessment

Study groups in NCT04058769
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
Software firstOtherPatients that are pre-operatively assessed first software-guided and then traditional
Receives: Device: Premedication Guide
TraditionalOtherPatients that are first pre-operatively assessed in the traditional way and then with aid of the software
Receives: Device: Premedication Guide

What is being measured

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

  1. correct approval for operation

    number of patients that were approved correctly for surgery

    Measured: 1 day

Secondary outcomes (5)
  1. missing examinations

    number of examinations that were recommended by the guidelines but not applied to the patient

    Measured: 1 day

  2. unnecessary examinations

    number of examinations that were not recommended by the guidelines but nevertheless applied

    Measured: 1 day

  3. mortality

    in-hospital mortality

    Measured: 30 days

  4. length of hospital stay

    length of hospital stay

    Measured: 30 days

  5. postoperative complications

    postoperative complications assessed by the Clavien-Dindo-Classification (I: no intervention, II: pharmacologic intervention, IIIa:intervention without general anesthesia, IIb: intervention requiring general anesthesia, IV:life-threatening intervention with dysfunction of one organ, IVb: life-threatening intervention with multi-organ dysfunction, V:death

    Measured: 30 days

Timeline

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

  1. First posted16 Aug 2019
  2. Study start1 May 2021
  3. Primary completion30 Jul 2022
  4. Study completion30 Sep 2022

Resources

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
Prevention
Allocation
Randomised
Intervention model
Crossover
Masking
Double blind
Who is masked
Investigator, Outcomes assessor
Enrolment
203 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT04058769
Sponsor's protocol ID
38/19 S-SR
Acronym
SGGIP
Status last verified
Mar 2022
First submitted
8 Aug 2019
Last updated
19 Oct 2022
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
Individual data sharing
No

Publications

  • Kagerbauer SM, Wissler J, Andonov DI, Ulm B, Schneider G, Podtschaske AH, Blobner M, Jungwirth B. Implementation of a software-based decision support tool for guideline-appropriate preoperative evaluation: a prospective agreement study. Br J Anaesth. 2024 Sep;133(3):519-529. doi: 10.1016/j.bja.2024.06.001. Epub 2024 Jul 5.

    PubMed 38971713

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing Premedication Guide in people with Pre-operative Assessment and Adults, run by Technical University of Munich at 1 site in Germany.

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 3 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 19 Oct 2022. 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 Germany. 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?

correct approval for operation (time frame: 1 day). 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 NCT04058769, which also lists 1 linked publication.

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 19 Oct 2022.

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