Trials
-
Medication errors, adverse drug events and potential adverse drug events are common and serious in terms of the harms and costs that they impose on the health system and those who use it. Errors resulting in preventable adverse drug events have been shown to occur most often at the stages of ordering and administration. This paper describes the protocol for a pragmatic trial of electronic prescribing to reduce prescription error. The trial was designed to overcome the limitations associated with traditional study design. ⋯ This paper describes the protocol for a pragmatic cluster randomized trial of point-of-care electronic prescribing, which was specifically designed to overcome the limitations associated with traditional study design.
-
The insertion of a Totally Implantable Access Port (TIAP) is a routinely employed technique in patients who need a safe and permanent venous access. The number of TIAP implantations is increasing constantly mainly due to advanced treatment options for malignant diseases. Therefore it is important to identify the implantation technique which has the optimal benefit/risk ratio for the patient. ⋯ The trial will be conducted in compliance with the protocol and in accordance with the moral, ethical, and scientific principles governing clinical research as set out in the Declaration of Helsinki (1989) and Good Clinical Practice (GCP). The trial will also be carried out in keeping with local and regulatory requirements. The Klinisches Studienzentrum Chirurgie (KSC)--Centre of Clinical Trials in Surgery at the Department of Surgery, University Hospital Heidelberg is responsible for planning and conduction of the trial. Documentation of patient's data will be accomplished via electronical Case Report Files (eCRF) with MACRO-Software by the KSC. Randomization, data management, monitoring and biometry are provided by the independent Koordinierungszentrum für Klinische Studien (KKS)--Coordination Centre for Clinical Trails at the University of Heidelberg.
-
Sharing of raw research data is common in many areas of medical research, genomics being perhaps the most well-known example. In the clinical trial community investigators routinely refuse to share raw data from a randomized trial without giving a reason. ⋯ Technological developments, particularly the Internet, have made data sharing generally a trivial logistical problem. Data sharing should come to be seen as an inherent part of conducting a randomized trial, similar to the way in which we consider ethical review and publication of study results. Journals and funding bodies should insist that trialists make raw data available, for example, by publishing data on the Web. If the clinical trial community continues to fail with respect to data sharing, we will only strengthen the public perception that we do clinical trials to benefit ourselves, not our patients.
-
Patients with a hemispheric infarct and massive space-occupying brain oedema have a poor prognosis. Despite maximal conservative treatment, the case fatality rate may be as high as 80%, and most survivors are left severely disabled. Non-randomised studies suggest that decompressive surgery reduces mortality substantially and improves functional outcome of survivors. This study is designed to compare the efficacy of decompressive surgery to improve functional outcome with that of conservative treatment in patients with space-occupying supratentorial infarction ⋯ The study design is that of a multi-centre, randomised clinical trial, which will include 112 patients aged between 18 and 60 years with a large hemispheric infarct with space-occupying oedema that leads to a decrease in consciousness. Patients will be randomised to receive either decompressive surgery in combination with medical treatment or best medical treatment alone. Randomisation will be stratified for the intended mode of conservative treatment (intensive care or stroke unit care). The primary outcome measure will be functional outcome, as determined by the score on the modified Rankin Scale, at one year.