AzTrials
AzTrials

Trauma, BrainACCEPTNCT06027411

Assess the Clinical Effectiveness in AI Prioritising CT Heads

An observational study of Trauma, Brain and Mass Lesion, run by Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust at 4 sites in United Kingdom.

Unknown status

Status not confirmed. The sponsor has not verified this record for over two years, so it may be out of date.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

Non-Contrast Computed Tomography (NCCT) of the head is the most common imaging method used to assess patients attending the Emergency Department (ED) with a wide range of significant neurological presentations including trauma, stroke, seizure and reduced consciousness. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 years and older
Conditions the study is for
Trauma, Brain, Mass Lesion, Skull Fractures
What is being tested?
qER (qER EU 2.0)
Type of treatment
Medical device
How many people
16,800 participants
Where
4 sitesUnited Kingdom
Study dates
27 Mar 2024to Aug 2024
How long will I take part?
28 Days
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
  • Adult, Older adult

Study population: At each of the four participating sites, we will identify all patients referred through the Emergency Department NCCT requests.

Who may be able to join

  • Individuals undergoing Head CT scan at the ED / A\&E (Accident and Emergency Services).
  • Non-contrast axial CT scan series with consistently spaced axial slices.
  • Soft reconstruction kernel covering the complete Brain.
  • Maximum slice thickness of 6mm.

Who cannot join

  • There are no explicit exclusion criteria for qER as all scans in inclusion criteria will be processed by qER. Exclusion criteria are implicit within the inclusion criteria listed above.

Trial locations and contacts

4 sites in 1 country.

Haris Shuaib, MSc contact

020 7188 7188

haris.shuaib@gstt.nhs.uk

Kavitha Vimalesvaran, MBBS MSc contact

020 7188 7188

kavitha.vimalesvaran@gstt.nhs.uk

United Kingdom4 sites, 4 recruiting
  • NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde

    Glasgow

    David J Lowe, 0141 201 4444, david.lowe@ggc.scot.nhs.uk

    Mark Hall, 0141 201 4444, mark.hall2@ggc.scot.nhs.uk

    Recruiting
  • Guy's and St.Thomas Trusts

    London, SE1 7EH

    Mariapaola Narbone, 020 7188 8888, mariapaola.narbone@gstt.nhs.uk

    Kavitha Vimalesvaran, 020 7188 8888, kavitha.vimalesvaran@gstt.nhs.uk

    Recruiting
  • Northumbria Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust

    Northumberland, NE27 0QJ

    Rahul Dharmadhikari, 0344 811 8118, rahul.dharmadhikari@northumbria-heatlthcare.nhs.uk

    Rahul Dharmadhikari

    Recruiting
  • Oxford University Hospitals

    Oxford, OX3 9DU

    Sarim Ather, 0300 304 7777, sarim.ather@ouh.nhs.uk

    Alex Novak, 0300 304 7777, alex.novak@ouh.nhs.uk

    Recruiting

Other trials in United Kingdom

About this study

Official title: A Mixed Methods Study to Assess the Clinical Effectiveness and Acceptability of qER Artificial Intelligence Software to Prioritise CT Head Interpretation.

Non-Contrast Computed Tomography (NCCT) of the head is the most common imaging method used to assess patients attending the Emergency Department (ED) with a wide range of significant neurological presentations including trauma, stroke, seizure and reduced consciousness. Rapid review of the images supports clinical decision-making including treatment and onward referral.

Radiologists, those reporting scans, often have significant backlogs and are unable to prioritise abnormal images of patients with time critical abnormalities. Similarly, identification of normal scans would support patient turnover in ED with significant waits and pressure on resources.

Read more

To address this problem, Qure.AI has worked to develop the market approved qER algorithm, which is a software program that can analyse CT head to identify presence of abnormalities supporting workflow prioritisation.

This study will trial the software in 4 NHS hospitals across the UK to evaluate the ability of the software to reduce the turnaround time of reporting scans with abnormalities that need to be prioritised.

Read the detailed description

Study background:

Emergency Departments (ED) across the UK are overburdened with increasing patient demand, radiology staff shortages and rising patient wait times. Head injuries are a frequent cause of emergency attendance in the UK with computed tomography(CT) scans usually the first imaging tests to diagnose head injuries and strokes.

A report issued by National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE), confirms that each year 1.4 million people attend emergency departments in England and Wales with head injury. Among the 200,000 patients admitted annually, one-fifth of them suffer from a Traumatic Brain Injury with skull fracture or evidence of brain damage. Head injury is the most common cause of death and disability in people up to the age of 40. Early detection and prompt treatment is vital to save lives and minimise risk of disability, according to the NICE guidelines of Head injury: assessment and early management. Head CT scans are the gold standard for diagnosing these and it is critical that these are performed and reported by Radiologists in line with NICE guidelines.

The potential applications of AI in radiology go well beyond image analysis for diagnostic and prognostic opportunities. It is becoming increasingly clear that AI algorithms have the potential to improve productivity, operational efficiency, and accuracy in diagnostic radiology. AI tools are being developed to aide diagnosis and enhance processes at multiple point in the radiology workflow including:

(a) protocolling the prioritised scan,(b) clinical decision support systems for detection of critical findings, (c) worklist priority adjustment via AI results, and (d) reducing turnaround time through worklist prioritisation and semiautomated structures reporting. The adoption of AI tools is dependent on the demonstration of a tangible effect on patient care and improvement in radiologist workflow.

Thus, in this study, we aim to assess whether real-world implementation of an AI tool which augments (b), (c) and (d) of the imaging life cycle would affect turnaround times.

qER medical device:

qER, a CE Class II approved medical software device, detects, and localizes the presence of six target abnormalities - intracranial haemorrhage, cranial fracture, midline shift, mass effect, atrophy and hypodensities suggestive of infarcts in non-contrast Head-CT scans. A priority status is assigned if any one of the target abnormalities (intracranial haemorrhage, cranial fracture, midline shift or mass effect) is detected by the software, and the user will be able to view a single summary slice listing all the target abnormalities found by qER on the CT scan followed by all slices in scan with the overlay of above abnormalities localization. Alternately, if none of the target abnormalities are detected, the output will indicate that the software has analysed the image and identified no critical findings. qER reports are intended to support certified radiologists and/or licensed medical practitioners for clinical decision making. It is a support tool and, when used with original scans, can assist the clinician to improve efficiency, accuracy, and turnaround time in reading head CTs. It is not to be used to provide medical advice, determine treatment plan, or recommend a course of action to the patient.

Study design:

A multi-centre stepped wedged cluster randomised study will be conducted in 4 NHS hospitals over a 13-month period. Hospitals will be identified and initiated into the qER solution with a 30-day implementation period. The order in which sites will receive the qER intervention will be determined by computer-based randomisation. The stepped wedge design allows delivery of the intervention at an organisational level with evaluation of outcome measures at a patient level. Structuring the implementation through a staged activation in a random order provides important methodological advantages for both qualitative and quantitative elements of the study. The design allows control of adoption bias and adjust for time-based changes in the background patient characteristics at a patient level.

All patients under this pathway would receive an AI reading, and no additional or different tests will be performed as a result of the AI findings. The turnaround time will be the interval between the time the scan was taken to the time when the final scan report becomes available and will be measured in minutes. When qER assistance is used for reporting Head-CT scans and if there is a difference between the output of the qER and the radiologist, the latter will be considered as final for further patient management.

Primary objective:

The primary objective is to assess if qER based reporting and triage significantly reduce turnaround time (TAT) of critical NCCT head reporting for patients attending the emergency department.

Secondary objective(s):

  • To assess utility of qER to support emergency department pathways for patients requiring NCCT head and radiology reporting workflow.
  • To assess the safety of qER at identifying patients with critical findings on NCCT heads.
  • To evaluate the technical performance of qER.
  • To conduct a Heath Economic, cost utility analysis of qER.
Being tested
qER (qER EU 2.0)
Medical subject headings
Brain Injuries, Traumatic, Skull Fractures, Intracranial Hemorrhages, Ischemic Stroke, Encephalomalacia

What participants receive

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

  • qER (qER EU 2.0)Device

    Qure.ai's emergency room software solution qER (qER EU 2.0) is an AI medical device, developed by training a deep-learning algorithm using over 300,000 scans labelled by expert radiologists. qER has been shown to be accurate in identifying a range of abnormalities in NCCT head scans as well as prioritising them for urgent review and radiologist reporting. It is designated as a clinical support tool and, when used with original scans, can assist the clinician to improve efficiency, accuracy, and turnaround time in reading head CTs.

Study groups in NCT06027411
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
Pre-implementation of qERBaseline data: During the pre-implementation phase, we will be gathering data around the technical requirements for integrating qER into the radiology workflow. A random sample of 500 scans per site will be sent for the ground-truthing process for the purpose of technical evaluation. We will also be collecting data on the baseline status of all the endpoints including TAT. The reporting of NCCT scans will follow the same workflow as the current standard of care (i.e., the images/cases will appear in the RIS chronologically and the radiologist either follows this order or prioritises some cases based on communication from ED).
Post-implementation of qERPost-implementation (Trial Intervention) In the post-implementation phase, there will be a notification (prioritised flag) in RIS. The order of the cases in RIS will not be altered. When the radiologist clicks a case in RIS, a secondary capture of qER along with the original images will be available in PACS. This secondary capture will have a contour showing the algorithm's attention point for a specific abnormality. The radiologist can then choose to agree with qER findings as it is or modify or ignore it according to their clinical judgement, writing and finally signing off the report. For scans which were not processed by qER the radiologist can prioritise and report as per the standard of care.
Receives: Device: qER (qER EU 2.0)

What is being measured

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

  1. Reporting turnaround time with qER prioritisation

    Time taken to report NCCT head from acquisition for patients with prioritised findings in Emergency Department compared to standard of care.

    Measured as time in minutes from the scan acquisition to the final radiology report of prioritised scans.

    Measured: 1 year

Secondary outcomes (14)
  1. Reporting turnaround time with qER prioritisation for scans without prioritised findings in Emergency Department compared to standard of care.

    Measured as time in minutes from the scan acquisition to the final radiology report of scans without prioritised findings.

    Measured: 1 year

  2. Reporting turnaround time with qER prioritisation for scans with an absence of findings in Emergency Department compared to standard of care.

    Measured as time in minutes from the scan acquisition to the final radiology report of scans with an absence of findings.

    Measured: 1 year

  3. Assess the impact of qER on radiology reporting workflow on other requests for CT scans.

    To assess how this impacts the types of CT scans requested from the Emergency Department.

    Measured: 1 year

  4. Impact of qER supported reporting on teleradiology.

    Time taken to report NCCT head from acquisition for patients in Emergency Department compared to standard of care where teleradiology is used.

    Measured: 1 year

  5. Assess utility of qER to support clinical decision making of the patients from the emergency department requiring an NCCT.

    Time to diagnosis from NCCT acquisition.

    Measured as time in hours for the electronic record of diagnosis assigned in the emergency department.

    Measured: 1 year

  6. Assess utility of qER to support referral or discharge of the patients from the emergency department requiring an NCCT.

    Time to referral or discharge designation from NCCT acquisition.

    Measured as time in hours to the electronic record of referral or discharge after diagnosis in the emergency department.

    Measured: 1 year

  7. Time to initiation of treatment from NCCT acquisition for prioritised scans.

    Time to initiation of treatment from NCCT acquisition.

    Measured as time in hours to the electronic record of the initiation of treatment in the emergency department.

    Measured: 1 year

  8. Death within 28 days of NCCT head acquisition.

    Number of patients presenting via the emergency department who then had a NCCT and died 28 days after their scan.

    Measured: 1 year

  9. Percentage of NCCT heads that qER classifies as prioritised, non-prioritised and absence of findings.

    Number of scans that qER identifies as prioritised, non-prioritised and absence of findings in accordance with the target abnormality definitions.

    Measured: 1 year

  10. Percentage of qER non-prioritised scans but identified by the radiologist as prioritised.

    Accuracy of qER in classifying non-prioritised scans in comparison to a radiologist.

    Rate of accurate classification of non-prioritised scans compared with the final radiology report.

    Measured: 1 year

  11. Percentage of qER non-prioritised scans but identified by the radiologist as absence of finding.

    Accuracy of qER in classifying scans with an absence of findings. Rate of accurate classification of scans with an absence of findings compared with the final radiology report.

    Measured: 1 year

  12. Technical evaluation of product performance.

    • Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of qER in detecting scans with prioritised findings overall and stratified by all six target abnormalities.
    • Percentage of CT scans that could not be processed by qER due to technical factors.

    Measured: 1 year

  13. Assess the safety of qER

    Mortality within 30 days of Emergency Department discharge.

    Measured by the number of study participants who upon discharge from the impatient setting are dead within 30 days.

    Measured: 1 year

  14. Health Economic Assessment

    To compare costs and health benefits between pre- and post-implementation of qER, including cost evaluation of fully automatic diagnosis of high confidence normal triage.

    Measured: 1 year

Timeline

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

  1. First posted7 Sep 2023
  2. Study start27 Mar 2024 (estimated)
  3. Primary completionAug 2024 (estimated)
  4. Study completionAug 2024 (estimated)

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
16,800 participants (estimated)
Target duration
28 Days
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT06027411
Sponsor's protocol ID
313507
Acronym
ACCEPT
Status last verified
Mar 2024
First submitted
11 Aug 2023
Last updated
21 Mar 2024
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
Yes
Individual data sharing
No

Publications

  • Vimalesvaran K, Robert D, Kumar S, Kumar A, Narbone M, Dharmadhikari R, Harrison M, Ather S, Novak A, Grzeda M, Gooch J, Woznitza N, Hall M, Shuaib H, Lowe DJ. Assessing the effectiveness of artificial intelligence (AI) in prioritising CT head interpretation: study protocol for a stepped-wedge cluster randomised trial (ACCEPT-AI). BMJ Open. 2024 Jun 16;14(6):e078227. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-078227.

    PubMed 38885990

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

An observational study of Trauma, Brain and Mass Lesion, run by Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust at 4 sites 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 4 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: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 21 Mar 2024. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 4 sites 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?

Results are not available in the source record.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

Contact Haris Shuaib, MSc (020 7188 7188, haris.shuaib@gstt.nhs.uk), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Reporting turnaround time with qER prioritisation (time frame: 1 year). 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 NCT06027411, 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 21 Mar 2024; AzTrials last refreshed its copy on 7 Nov 2026.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in