• Blood purification · Jan 2009

    Multicenter Study

    Screening and study enrolment in the Randomized Evaluation of Normal vs. Augmented Level (RENAL) Replacement Therapy Trial.

    • RENAL Replacement Therapy Trial Investigators, Rinaldo Bellomo, Alan Cass, Louise Cole, Simon Finfer, Martin Gallagher, Donna Goldsmith, John Myburgh, Robyn Norton, and Carlos Scheinkestel.
    • Blood Purif. 2009 Jan 1; 27 (2): 199-205.

    Background And ObjectivesAspects of trial design, screening and study efficiency can affect recruitment and the findings of the trial itself. A clear understanding of the screening and study inclusion process will assist clinicians in interpreting trial results.DesignProspective observational data collection on all patients screened for possible inclusion in a randomized controlled trial of normal vs. augmented renal replacement therapy in critically ill patients (the RENAL Trial).Setting35 hospitals in Australia and New Zealand.ParticipantsAll patients screened for the RENAL Trial.ResultsWe screened 4,551 patients. Of these patients, 767 were ineligible because of lack of inclusion criteria and 2,085 because of exclusion criteria. Of the remaining 1,699, 1,508 (88.7%) were enrolled. The three most common exclusion criteria which prevented recruitment of potentially eligible patients were that the patient had end-stage kidney failure and was already on chronic dialysis (484; 23.2%), the patient's body weight was either <60 or >120 kg (456; 21.8%), and the fact that the patient had already received renal replacement therapy during the index admission. Important modifiable impediments to recruitment were inability to obtain consent in 191 cases, unavailability of research staff in 124 cases, physician objection in 89 cases, and inability to deliver the trial protocol in 78 cases.ConclusionThe RENAL Trial's enrolment efficiency was high and compared favourably with previous large intensive care units trials and with that of trials in patients with acute renal failure. The high rate of enrolment suggests that the results can be applied with confidence to most patients with de novo acute renal failure. The loss of close to 1.5% of patients due to consent issues highlights a common problem in critical care trials. The low rate of physician objection suggests clinical equipoise.

      Pubmed     Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.