Extracorporeal Membrane OxygenationESTRELLANCT06400797
Estimation of Outcome and Quality of Life in ECMO Patients
An observational study of Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation, run by Heinrich-Heine University, Duesseldorf at 1 site in Germany.
Trial summary
The availability as well as the use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) systems for severe acute respiratory or cardiocirculatory failure is steadily increasing. The decision to initiate ECMO therapy is predominantly made in emergency situations, for which the focus is on acute survival. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation
- What is being tested?
- estimation of patient outcome by health care providers
- How many people
- 1,000 participants
- Where
- 1 siteGermany
- Study dates
- 1 Jan 2024to 1 Jan 2029
- 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
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Study population: All patients aged above 18 years in the ICU with a vv- or va-ECMO for less than 24 hours will be included.
Who may be able to join
- age ≥ 18 years
- start of ECMO therapy ≤24h
- written informed consent from patient or health-care proxy
Who cannot join
- age < 18 years
- Language barrier (communication in German/local language or English not possible).
- no ECMO therapy or ECMO therapy longer than 24h
- no written consent
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.
Germany1 site, 1 recruiting
- Recruiting
University Hospital Duesseldorf
Düsseldorf, North Rhine-Westphalia, 40225
René M'Pembele, MD, +4902118118451, rene.mpembele@med.uni-duesseldorf.de
About this study
Official title: ESTimation of Outcome by Health-Care PRoviders Compared With TruE Outcome in Patients Undergoing Veno-arteriaL and Veno-venous ExtracorporeaL MembrAne Oxygenation
The availability as well as the use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) systems for severe acute respiratory or cardiocirculatory failure is steadily increasing. The decision to initiate ECMO therapy is predominantly made in emergency situations, for which the focus is on acute survival. The decisions if a patient will profit from ECMO therapy are mainly made from clinical experience and educated guess by the attending team. However, it is unknown how useful these clinical predictions are. Therefore, this observational study will compare estimated and real outcome of ECMO patients.
Read the detailed description
The availability as well as the use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) systems for severe acute respiratory (veno-venous, vv-ECMO) or cardiocirculatory (veno-arterial, va-ECMO) failure is steadily increasing. Despite increasing experience of specialized centres, mortality of ECMO patients remains high and only about 50% survive the initial hospital stay. For those patients who do leave the hospital alive, quality of life after this invasive therapy with long stays in the intensive care unit (ICU) is often limited and participation in social life can be difficult. Quality of life and the life-impact after ECMO therapy is, in contrast to hard endpoints such as mortality, insufficiently studied and currently only scarce data exist from large prospective cohort studies. Further, predictive scores and associated risk factors for patient-centred outcomes are not available.
The decision to initiate ECMO therapy is predominantly made in emergency situations, for which the focus is on acute survival. As such, the long-term implications in terms of quality of life and life-impact of ECMO treatment enjoy only limited consideration at an early time point. Further, the existing scores for prediction in ECMO were developed for mortality and reliable data on long-term life-impact are scarce. Therefore, while these decisions are influenced by empirical factors like patient-age, point-of-care laboratory parameters (e.g. lactate) or the neurological status of the patient, the clinical experience and educated guess in terms of prognosis and potential treatment futility by the attending team remains a crucial factor. This applies not only to ECMO initiation but also to decisions on continuation and termination. This approach to decision-making may be problematic since it has been shown for other settings that clinicians tend to overestimate the success of an intervention. Currently, there are no data evaluating in how far this also applies to ECMO therapy and if indeed, there is a mismatch between estimated and observed outcomes in ECMO patients. Considering the crucial role of subjective prognosis estimates, it becomes of major interest to quantify the potential mis-calibration between clinicians estimated and observed outcomes. Further, factors like Outcome uncertainties, potential doubts regarding treatment utility vs futility, and the immediate finality of these demanding decisions expose ICU health-care personnel to a relevant psychological burden. As shown by Johnson-Coyle and colleagues, both moral distress and burnout have a negative impact on job satisfaction. Moral distress occurs when one believes to know what is ethically right but something or someone limits their ability to do the right thing. Preliminary studies have shown a high incidence of moral distress in the care of patients with mechanical circulatory support systems, with particularly pronounced stress among nursing personnel. If these factors have significant impact on professional judgement is not clear in this context.
In a small single centre pilot study, we prospectively recruited 50 va-ECMO patients at the University Hospital Duesseldorf from March until November 2023 and investigated if ECMO care providers could predict in-hospital mortality in these patients. For these 50 patients we obtained 135 completed questionnaires within 24 hours and 111 answered questionnaires at day 4 to7 after initiation of ECMO therapy from consultants, residents and nursing personnel. Out of 50 patients 21 patients (42%) died during the initial hospital stay. Overall sensitivity and specificity of estimates were 57.9% and 85.9% respectively at 24 hours after start of ECMO therapy (precision: 75%, accuracy: 74.1%, F1 score: 65.3%). In a subgroup analysis, consultants showed highest agreement of estimated and actual in hospital mortality, whereas residents showed lowest agreement (see table below). At day 4 to 7 overall predictions had lower sensitivity, accuracy, precision and F1-score as compared to estimates on day 1 after ECMO initiation, however specificity slightly increased (sens: 35% spec: 91.5% acc: 71.1% F1-score: 46.7% precision: 70%). Highest values for sensitivity, accuracy and F1-score, were reached in subgroup of nursing personnel (see table below). Notably, years of experience in critical care were higher in consultants and nursing personnel as compared to residents (consultants: 10.8 ± 6.7 years versus residents: 1.4 ± 1.5 years versus nursing personnel: 15.8 ± 10.4 years).
Based on the results of our pilot data, we hypothesize that:
- Subjective prognosis estimates by health care providers underestimate (low sensitivity) actual mortality. We expect that this will also account for reduced functionality and quality of life.
- Estimations will vary significantly between different groups of health care professionals and levels of experience in critical care as well as between different time points of assessment. Specifically we expect, that prediction accuracy will improve with higher years of experience in critical care and that predictions for mortality will be more accurate immediately after ECMO initiation as compared to later study time points. This might be influenced by the fact that a substantial number of patients with poor prognosis will die within the first four days of ECMO therapy. Hence, estimation of outcome in the remaining patients is more difficult.
- Agreement between estimated and observed outcomes will differ significantly between centres with different levels of experience (high-volume versus low-volume centres). Expecting higher accuracy of outcome estimates in high-volume centres with higher experience as compared to low-volume centres.
- Additionally, we expect that high levels of moral distress influence professional judgement leading to negative estimated prognosis and low precisions of estimations.
Therefore, we aim to conduct the ESTRELLA study as large nationwide multicentre prospective cohort study to dissect usability of clinical estimates for outcome prediction in ECMO patients and to identify suitable factors for prediction of poor functional health in these patients.
- Conditions
- Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation
- Being tested
- estimation of patient outcome by health care providers
- Keywords
- ECMO, health related quality of life, Outcome estimation
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
estimation of patient outcome by health care providersOther
On day 1 after study inclusion as well as day 4-7, the responsible health-care providers (at least one nurse, one resident and one consultant with the board certification intensive care medicine) will estimate the patient's expected functional outcome at 6 and 12 months after the start of ECMO therapy. Health-care providers responsible for the patient at that time will be surveyed (multiple questionnaires to detect specific differences within one person are not planned). For the purpose of functional outcome estimation, the modified Rankin scale (mRS) is used.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| ECMO patients | Patients recieving Venoarterial or Venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO, VV-ECMO) Receives: Other: estimation of patient outcome by health care providers |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Agreement between estimated outcome by healthcare providers and actual patient outcome on Modified Rankin scale mRS
The primary endpoint of this study will be the agreement between functional performance of patients estimated by different healthcare provider groups and actual functional performance of patients after start of ECMO therapy measured by the 7-item mRS.
Measured: 6 months and 12 months after ECMO therapy
Secondary outcomes (3)
Disability-free survival (WHODAS 2.0)
As secondary endpoints we will assess disability free survival at 6 and 12 months after ECMO therapy using the WHODAS 2.0 questionnaire with a disability threshold of ≥16 % for mild disability and ≥35% for severe disability as described previously by Shulman et al.
Measured: 6 months and 12 months after ECMO therapy
Days alive and out of hospital (DAOH)
we will assess Days alive and out of hospital at 6 and 12 months after initiation of ECMO therapy, as additional life impact parameter which was previously investigated in other cohorts
Measured: 6 months and 12 months after ECMO therapy
Moral distress
we will assess the level of moral distress of ICU health care providers (consultants, residents and nursing personnel) taking care of the individual patient using the Moral Distress Thermometer.
Measured: Day 1 and day 4-7 of ECMO therapy
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted6 May 2024
- Study start1 Jan 2024
- Primary completion1 Jan 2028 (estimated)
- Study completion1 Jan 2029 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Extracorporeal Membrane OxygenationStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Heinrich-Heine University, DuesseldorfThe 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
- Prospective
- Enrolment
- 1,000 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Heinrich-Heine University, Duesseldorf
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- René M'Pembele, MD, Principal investigator, Heinrich-Heine University, DuesseldorfSebastian Roth, MD, Principal investigator, Heinrich-Heine University, Duesseldorf
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06400797
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 2024-RM-01
- Acronym
- ESTRELLA
- Status last verified
- May 2024
- First submitted
- 2 May 2024
- Last updated
- 6 May 2024
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No: There is no plan to share IPD.
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 6 May 2024. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- ESTimation of Outcome by Health-Care PRoviders Compared With TruE Outcome in Patients Undergoing Veno-arteriaL and Veno-venous ExtracorporeaL MembrAne Oxygenation
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06400797
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- ESTRELLA / 2024-RM-01
- Conditions
- Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation
- Keywords
- ECMO, health related quality of life, Outcome estimation
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Recruiting
- Enrolment
- 1,000 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Heinrich-Heine University, DuesseldorfUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 Jan 2024 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 1 Jan 2028 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 1 Jan 2029 (estimated)
- First posted
- 6 May 2024 (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.
The availability as well as the use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) systems for severe acute respiratory or cardiocirculatory failure is steadily increasing. The decision to initiate ECMO therapy is predominantly made in emergency situations, for which the focus is on acute survival. The decisions if a patient will profit from ECMO therapy are mainly made from clinical experience and educated guess by the attending team. However, it is unknown how useful these clinical predictions are. Therefore, this observational study will compare estimated and real outcome of ECMO patients.
Detailed description
The availability as well as the use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) systems for severe acute respiratory (veno-venous, vv-ECMO) or cardiocirculatory (veno-arterial, va-ECMO) failure is steadily increasing. Despite increasing experience of specialized centres, mortality of ECMO patients remains high and only about 50% survive the initial hospital stay. For those patients who do leave the hospital alive, quality of life after this invasive therapy with long stays in the intensive care unit (ICU) is often limited and participation in social life can be difficult. Quality of life and the life-impact after ECMO therapy is, in contrast to hard endpoints such as mortality, insufficiently studied and currently only scarce data exist from large prospective cohort studies. Further, predictive scores and associated risk factors for patient-centred outcomes are not available.
The decision to initiate ECMO therapy is predominantly made in emergency situations, for which the focus is on acute survival. As such, the long-term implications in terms of quality of life and life-impact of ECMO treatment enjoy only limited consideration at an early time point. Further, the existing scores for prediction in ECMO were developed for mortality and reliable data on long-term life-impact are scarce. Therefore, while these decisions are influenced by empirical factors like patient-age, point-of-care laboratory parameters (e.g. lactate) or the neurological status of the patient, the clinical experience and educated guess in terms of prognosis and potential treatment futility by the attending team remains a crucial factor. This applies not only to ECMO initiation but also to decisions on continuation and termination. This approach to decision-making may be problematic since it has been shown for other settings that clinicians tend to overestimate the success of an intervention. Currently, there are no data evaluating in how far this also applies to ECMO therapy and if indeed, there is a mismatch between estimated and observed outcomes in ECMO patients. Considering the crucial role of subjective prognosis estimates, it becomes of major interest to quantify the potential mis-calibration between clinicians estimated and observed outcomes. Further, factors like Outcome uncertainties, potential doubts regarding treatment utility vs futility, and the immediate finality of these demanding decisions expose ICU health-care personnel to a relevant psychological burden. As shown by Johnson-Coyle and colleagues, both moral distress and burnout have a negative impact on job satisfaction. Moral distress occurs when one believes to know what is ethically right but something or someone limits their ability to do the right thing. Preliminary studies have shown a high incidence of moral distress in the care of patients with mechanical circulatory support systems, with particularly pronounced stress among nursing personnel. If these factors have significant impact on professional judgement is not clear in this context.
In a small single centre pilot study, we prospectively recruited 50 va-ECMO patients at the University Hospital Duesseldorf from March until November 2023 and investigated if ECMO care providers could predict in-hospital mortality in these patients. For these 50 patients we obtained 135 completed questionnaires within 24 hours and 111 answered questionnaires at day 4 to7 after initiation of ECMO therapy from consultants, residents and nursing personnel. Out of 50 patients 21 patients (42%) died during the initial hospital stay. Overall sensitivity and specificity of estimates were 57.9% and 85.9% respectively at 24 hours after start of ECMO therapy (precision: 75%, accuracy: 74.1%, F1 score: 65.3%). In a subgroup analysis, consultants showed highest agreement of estimated and actual in hospital mortality, whereas residents showed lowest agreement (see table below). At day 4 to 7 overall predictions had lower sensitivity, accuracy, precision and F1-score as compared to estimates on day 1 after ECMO initiation, however specificity slightly increased (sens: 35% spec: 91.5% acc: 71.1% F1-score: 46.7% precision: 70%). Highest values for sensitivity, accuracy and F1-score, were reached in subgroup of nursing personnel (see table below). Notably, years of experience in critical care were higher in consultants and nursing personnel as compared to residents (consultants: 10.8 ± 6.7 years versus residents: 1.4 ± 1.5 years versus nursing personnel: 15.8 ± 10.4 years).
Based on the results of our pilot data, we hypothesize that:
- Subjective prognosis estimates by health care providers underestimate (low sensitivity) actual mortality. We expect that this will also account for reduced functionality and quality of life.
- Estimations will vary significantly between different groups of health care professionals and levels of experience in critical care as well as between different time points of assessment. Specifically we expect, that prediction accuracy will improve with higher years of experience in critical care and that predictions for mortality will be more accurate immediately after ECMO initiation as compared to later study time points. This might be influenced by the fact that a substantial number of patients with poor prognosis will die within the first four days of ECMO therapy. Hence, estimation of outcome in the remaining patients is more difficult.
- Agreement between estimated and observed outcomes will differ significantly between centres with different levels of experience (high-volume versus low-volume centres). Expecting higher accuracy of outcome estimates in high-volume centres with higher experience as compared to low-volume centres.
- Additionally, we expect that high levels of moral distress influence professional judgement leading to negative estimated prognosis and low precisions of estimations.
Therefore, we aim to conduct the ESTRELLA study as large nationwide multicentre prospective cohort study to dissect usability of clinical estimates for outcome prediction in ECMO patients and to identify suitable factors for prediction of poor functional health in these patients.
Study design
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Number of arms
- 1
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| ECMO patients | – | Other: estimation of patient outcome by health care providersPatients recieving Venoarterial or Venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO, VV-ECMO) |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- All patients aged above 18 years in the ICU with a vv- or va-ECMO for less than 24 hours will be included.
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- age ≥ 18 years
- start of ECMO therapy ≤24h
- written informed consent from patient or health-care proxy
Key exclusion criteria (4 listed)
- age < 18 years
- Language barrier (communication in German/local language or English not possible).
- no ECMO therapy or ECMO therapy longer than 24h
- no written consent
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 |
|---|---|---|
| estimation of patient outcome by health care providersOn day 1 after study inclusion as well as day 4-7, the responsible health-care providers (at least one nurse, one resident and one consultant with the board certification intensive care medicine) will estimate the patient's expected functional outcome at 6 and 12 months after the start of ECMO therapy. Health-care providers responsible for the patient at that time will be surveyed (multiple questionnaires to detect specific differences within one person are not planned). For the purpose of functional outcome estimation, the modified Rankin scale (mRS) is used. | Other | ECMO patients |
Primary outcome
Agreement between estimated outcome by healthcare providers and actual patient outcome on Modified Rankin scale mRS
Time frame: 6 months and 12 months after ECMO therapy
The primary endpoint of this study will be the agreement between functional performance of patients estimated by different healthcare provider groups and actual functional performance of patients after start of ECMO therapy measured by the 7-item mRS.
3 secondary outcomes
Disability-free survival (WHODAS 2.0)
Time frame: 6 months and 12 months after ECMO therapy
Days alive and out of hospital (DAOH)
Time frame: 6 months and 12 months after ECMO therapy
Moral distress
Time frame: Day 1 and day 4-7 of ECMO therapy
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 6 May 2024.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No. There is no plan to share IPD.
Related trials for Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation
Enrolling by invitation
Personalized Ventilator Settings for Patients on ECMO
Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS), Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Diagnosis of ECMO Cannula Infection: Prospective Comparison of Sampling Methods
ECMO Cannula Infection, Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Complication
RecruitingObservational study
Effect of Transpulmonary MP on Prognosis of Patients With Severe ARDS Treated With VV-ECMO
Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome, Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation
Not yet recruitingPhase 1/2
PACE: Prostacyclin AntiCoagulation in ECMO
ECMO
RecruitingObservational study
Pharmacokinetics of Sedatives and Analgesics During Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (ECMO) Support
Drug Effect
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.
René M'Pembele, MD principal investigator
Heinrich-Heine University, Duesseldorf
Sebastian Roth, MD principal investigator
Heinrich-Heine University, Duesseldorf
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 Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation, run by Heinrich-Heine University, Duesseldorf 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 3 inclusion and 4 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: looking for participants now, as of the sponsor's last update on 6 May 2024. 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?
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?
Contact René M'Pembele, MD (02118118451, rene.mpembele@med.uni-duesseldorf.de), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Agreement between estimated outcome by healthcare providers and actual patient outcome on Modified Rankin scale mRS (time frame: 6 months and 12 months after ECMO therapy). 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 6 May 2024.