Dexmedetomidine Versus Midazolam for Facilitating Extubation
NCT ID: NCT00744380
Last Updated: 2016-09-28
Study Results
Outcome measurements, participant flow, baseline characteristics, and adverse events have been published for this study.
View full resultsBasic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
NA
23 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2008-08-31
2012-10-31
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
A Safety and Efficacy Study of Dexmedetomidine in ICU Patients Requiring Continuous Sedation
NCT00216190
Dexmedetomidine Versus Midazolam for Continuous Sedation in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU)
NCT00481312
Dexmedetomidine Versus Propofol for Continuous Sedation in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU)
NCT00479661
Dexmedetomidine Versus Propofol in the Medical Intensive Care Unit (MICU)
NCT01059929
Use of Dexmedetomidine to Facilitate Extubation in Surgical ICU Patients Who Failed Previous Weaning Attempts
NCT00464490
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Objectives:
The objectives of this study are to determine if transitioning conventional sedation to dexmedetomidine safely facilitates tracheal extubation after study initiation; alters the amounts of sedative and analgesic agents required after study initiation; influences the levels of sedation and analgesia; alters the adverse event profile (neurologic, hemodynamic, or gastrointestinal) during and after discontinuing sedation; and impacts the total cost of sedation during and after discontinuing sedation.
Hypothesis 1: Transitioning conventional sedation to dexmedetomidine expedites tracheal extubation to shorten ventilator time.
Specific Aim 1: Comparatively determine the time from study initiation to tracheal extubation with midazolam and dexmedetomidine when the practice of daily awakenings is used.
Hypothesis 2: Transitioning conventional sedation to dexmedetomidine reduces the doses of conventional sedatives and analgesics while maintaining equivalent levels of sedation and analgesia and not incurring adverse events.
Specific Aim 2a: Comparatively determine the hourly, daily, and cumulative doses of conventional sedatives and analgesics from study initiation to sedation discontinuation with midazolam and dexmedetomidine when the practice of daily awakenings is used.
Specific Aim 2b: Comparatively evaluate the quality of sedation and analgesia of midazolam and dexmedetomidine by determining the proportion of Riker sedation scores at 3 - 4 (desired level of sedation) and ≤ 2 or ≥ 5 (undesired levels of sedation) and the proportion of Pain Assessment Behavioral Scores (PABS) ≤ 3 (comfortable) and ≥ 4 (pain).
Specific Aim 2c: Comparatively evaluate sedation-related adverse effects (neurologic, hemodynamic, or gastrointestinal) of midazolam and dexmedetomidine when the practice of daily awakenings is used.
Hypothesis 3: Transitioning conventional sedation to dexmedetomidine increases the cost of administering sedation but minimizes the incidental costs associated with sedation to counterbalance and possibly reduce the total cost of sedation (sum of administration costs and incidental costs).
Specific Aim 3a: Comparatively determine the hourly, daily, and cumulative administration costs of midazolam and dexmedetomidine when the practice of daily awakenings is used.
Specific Aim 3b: Comparatively determine the hourly, daily, and cumulative incidental costs of conventional sedatives and dexmedetomidine; including neurologic dysfunction, antipsychotic requirements, cardiovascular dysfunction, constipation or ileus, differences in times to ventilator discontinuation, personnel time, and patient transfer from the ICU after sedation discontinuation.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
TREATMENT
QUADRUPLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Midazolam
Midazolam infusion of 1 mg/hour (final infusion concentration of 0.5 mg/mL) and adjusted by 1 mg/hour by the bedside nurse as needed for the desired level of sedation (Riker sedation-agitation score of 3 - 4) as other sedatives are down titrated. Daily awakenings are used.
Midazolam
Midazolam infusion of 1 mg/hour (final infusion concentration of 0.5 mg/mL) and adjusted by 1 mg/hour by the bedside nurse as needed for the desired level of sedation (Riker sedation-agitation score of 3 - 4)
Dexmedetomidine
Dexmedetomidine 0.15 µg/kg per hour (final infusion concentration of 0.075 µg/kg per mL) and adjusted by 0.15 µg/kg per hour by the bedside nurse as needed for the desired level of sedation (Riker sedation-agitation score of 3 - 4)as other sedatives are down titrated. Daily awakenings are used.
Dexmedetomidine
Dexmedetomidine 0.15 µg/kg per hour (final infusion concentration of 0.075 µg/kg per mL) and adjusted by 0.15 µg/kg per hour by the bedside nurse as needed for the desired level of sedation (Riker sedation-agitation score of 3 - 4)
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Midazolam
Midazolam infusion of 1 mg/hour (final infusion concentration of 0.5 mg/mL) and adjusted by 1 mg/hour by the bedside nurse as needed for the desired level of sedation (Riker sedation-agitation score of 3 - 4)
Dexmedetomidine
Dexmedetomidine 0.15 µg/kg per hour (final infusion concentration of 0.075 µg/kg per mL) and adjusted by 0.15 µg/kg per hour by the bedside nurse as needed for the desired level of sedation (Riker sedation-agitation score of 3 - 4)
Other Intervention Names
Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
2. Currently receiving lorazepam or midazolam by continuous infusion for the purpose of sedation therapy.
3. Sedation in these ICUs is provided using an ICU-wide order form that preferentially uses either lorazepam or midazolam with the infusion rate titrated by the bedside nurse to the desired Riker sedation-agitation score(s). Continuous analgesia is provided with fentanyl only with the infusion rate titrated by the bedside nurse to PABS ≤ 3 .
4. Anticipated duration of continuous sedation \> 12 hours with the level of sedation expected to be maintained at Riker sedation-agitation score(s) of 3 - 4.
5. Patients qualifying for daily awakenings as determined by all of the following:
* fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) ≤ 70% or
* positive end expiratory pressure (PEEP) ≤ 14 cmH2O,
* hemodynamically stable, and
* NOT receiving pharmacologic neuromuscular blockade.
6. Informed consent and HIPAA authorization within 24 hours of qualifying for daily awakenings.
Exclusion Criteria
2. Patients receiving intermittent or "as needed" administration of lorazepam or midazolam.
3. Patients receiving lorazepam or midazolam for purposes other than sedation (e.g. seizure control).
4. Patients receiving epidural administration of medication(s).
5. Patients with Childs-Pugh class C liver disease.
6. Comatose patients by metabolic or neurologic affectation.
7. Patients with active myocardial ischemia or second- or third-degree heart block.
8. Moribund state with planned withdrawal of life support.
9. Patients with known or suspected severe adverse reactions to midazolam (or any other benzodiazepine) or dexmedetomidine (or clonidine).
10. Patients with alcohol abuse within six months of study eligibility.
11. Pregnant females or females suspected of being pregnant.
18 Years
85 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Hospira, now a wholly owned subsidiary of Pfizer
INDUSTRY
University of Colorado, Denver
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Robert MacLaren, PharmD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
University of Colorado Skaggs School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
University of Colorado Hospital
Aurora, Colorado, United States
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
MacLaren R, Preslaski CR, Mueller SW, Kiser TH, Fish DN, Lavelle JC, Malkoski SP. A randomized, double-blind pilot study of dexmedetomidine versus midazolam for intensive care unit sedation: patient recall of their experiences and short-term psychological outcomes. J Intensive Care Med. 2015 Mar;30(3):167-75. doi: 10.1177/0885066613510874. Epub 2013 Nov 12.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
08-0570
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.