The Frequency of Screening and SBT Technique Trial: The FAST Trial
![]() |
The safety and scientific validity of this study is the responsibility of the study sponsor and investigators. Listing a study does not mean it has been evaluated by the U.S. Federal Government. Read our disclaimer for details. |
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02969226 |
Recruitment Status : Unknown
Verified December 2018 by Unity Health Toronto.
Recruitment status was: Recruiting
First Posted : November 21, 2016
Last Update Posted : December 5, 2018
|
Tracking Information | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
First Submitted Date ICMJE | November 17, 2016 | ||||
First Posted Date ICMJE | November 21, 2016 | ||||
Last Update Posted Date | December 5, 2018 | ||||
Actual Study Start Date ICMJE | January 18, 2018 | ||||
Estimated Primary Completion Date | March 2021 (Final data collection date for primary outcome measure) | ||||
Current Primary Outcome Measures ICMJE |
Time to successful extubation [ Time Frame: 3-4 years ] time from randomization to successful extubation
|
||||
Original Primary Outcome Measures ICMJE |
Time to successful extubation [ Time Frame: 3-4 years ] | ||||
Change History | |||||
Current Secondary Outcome Measures ICMJE |
|
||||
Original Secondary Outcome Measures ICMJE |
|
||||
Current Other Pre-specified Outcome Measures | Not Provided | ||||
Original Other Pre-specified Outcome Measures | Not Provided | ||||
Descriptive Information | |||||
Brief Title ICMJE | The Frequency of Screening and SBT Technique Trial: The FAST Trial | ||||
Official Title ICMJE | The Frequency of Screening and SBT Technique Trial: The FAST Trial, A North American Weaning Collaboration | ||||
Brief Summary | Background: The sickest patients who are admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU) often require assistance with their breathing. When patients start to get better, they gradually do more of the breathing and the machine does less-this is called weaning. Although ventilator use saves lives, the longer it is used, the more complications can occur. Clinicians aim to wean patients from ventilators in a timely and safe manner. In most ICUs, patients are screened (looked at) once per day to see if they are ready to undergo a weaning test (using a variety of techniques) to see if the breathing tube can be removed. Screening more than once per day may allow more weaning tests to be conducted. Knowing the best way to do a weaning test is important because some methods may better determine who can have the breathing tube removed safely. At present, we don't know the best way to help our sickest patients to wean from ventilators. Patients: Adults in North American ICUs who are on ventilators for at least 24 hours and who can take breaths on their own. Interventions: Patients in our study will receive one type of screening and one type of weaning test at random. In the 'once daily' screening groups, clinicians will screen patients each morning. In the 'two or more times daily screening' groups, patients will be screened in the morning, afternoon, and whenever else clinicians wish to screen. When screening criteria are met, patients will undergo one of two weaning tests with low ventilator support or no support. Outcomes: The main outcome of this study will be the time for patients to be successfully removed from the ventilator. Relevance: For patients, this study will clarify the best way to remove them from ventilators in a timely and safe manner. For clinicians and our health care systems, this study holds promise to improve how critically ill patients are weaned from breathing machines. |
||||
Detailed Description | Goals
Rationale: Nearly 40% of the time on invasive ventilation is spent weaning. In minimizing patients' exposure to invasive ventilation, clinicians are challenged by a trade-off between the complications associated with protracted ventilation and the risks [ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP), mortality] of premature, failed attempts at extubation. Although randomized trials have been conducted to evaluate different screening practices and spontaneous breathing trial (SBT) techniques, most trials were small, predated daily screening, and have limited generalizability to the North American (NA) context where weaning involves respiratory therapists (RTs) and physicians. In a systematic review of 17 trials (n=2,434), we found that screening protocols, compared to usual care, were associated with a 26% reduction in total duration of ventilation, a 70% reduction in weaning time, and an 11% reduction in ICU stay. Only 1 trial (n=385) compared twice daily screening to usual care and found that patients screened twice daily spent significantly less time on ventilators. Once daily screening is poorly aligned with the continuous care ICU environment. In our international survey, Pressure Support (PS) with positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) and T-piece were the most commonly used SBT techniques. Concerns exist that PS and T-piece SBTs may over and underestimate, respectively, patients' ability to breathe after extubation. Only 1 trial (n=484) has compared T-piece and PS SBTs and found no difference in outcomes. This trial was conducted in Europe, predated daily screening, and was underpowered. Design: The investigators will conduct a factorial design trial involving 760 patients in 20 NA ICUs. Population: The investigators will enroll critically ill adults receiving invasive ventilation for > 24 hours who can initiate or trigger breaths on commonly used weaning modes. Comparators: Patients will be randomized to undergo a screening frequency (once vs. at least twice daily) AND an SBT technique (T-piece vs. PS ± PEEP). Outcomes: The primary outcome will be the time to successful extubation. Secondary outcomes will include general and ventilation-specific outcomes that are important to citizens. We expect that more frequent screening, regardless of SBT technique, will reduce time to successful extubation. This trial will identify the best strategy to reduce the time patients spend on ventilators and in ICUs, clarify best weaning practices, enhance care delivery, and launch a new paradigm of engagement into our research. |
||||
Study Type ICMJE | Interventional | ||||
Study Phase ICMJE | Not Applicable | ||||
Study Design ICMJE | Allocation: Randomized Intervention Model: Factorial Assignment Masking: None (Open Label) Primary Purpose: Screening |
||||
Condition ICMJE | Critically Ill | ||||
Intervention ICMJE |
|
||||
Study Arms ICMJE |
|
||||
Publications * | Not Provided | ||||
* Includes publications given by the data provider as well as publications identified by ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier (NCT Number) in Medline. |
|||||
Recruitment Information | |||||
Recruitment Status ICMJE | Unknown status | ||||
Estimated Enrollment ICMJE |
760 | ||||
Original Estimated Enrollment ICMJE | Same as current | ||||
Estimated Study Completion Date ICMJE | March 2021 | ||||
Estimated Primary Completion Date | March 2021 (Final data collection date for primary outcome measure) | ||||
Eligibility Criteria ICMJE | Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
|
||||
Sex/Gender ICMJE |
|
||||
Ages ICMJE | 16 Years and older (Child, Adult, Older Adult) | ||||
Accepts Healthy Volunteers ICMJE | No | ||||
Contacts ICMJE | Contact information is only displayed when the study is recruiting subjects | ||||
Listed Location Countries ICMJE | Canada, United States | ||||
Removed Location Countries | |||||
Administrative Information | |||||
NCT Number ICMJE | NCT02969226 | ||||
Other Study ID Numbers ICMJE | FAST-002 | ||||
Has Data Monitoring Committee | No | ||||
U.S. FDA-regulated Product |
|
||||
IPD Sharing Statement ICMJE |
|
||||
Current Responsible Party | Unity Health Toronto | ||||
Original Responsible Party | Karen Burns, Unity Health Toronto, Principal Investigator | ||||
Current Study Sponsor ICMJE | Unity Health Toronto | ||||
Original Study Sponsor ICMJE | Same as current | ||||
Collaborators ICMJE | Not Provided | ||||
Investigators ICMJE |
|
||||
PRS Account | Unity Health Toronto | ||||
Verification Date | December 2018 | ||||
ICMJE Data element required by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors and the World Health Organization ICTRP |