Effectiveness and Feasibility of Patient Controlled Analgesia in the ED

NCT ID: NCT01775371

Last Updated: 2020-12-04

Study Results

Results available

Outcome measurements, participant flow, baseline characteristics, and adverse events have been published for this study.

View full results

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

636 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2013-04-30

Study Completion Date

2016-02-29

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

Background: Inadequate pain management is common in the Emergency Department (ED). Optimal treatment of pain necessitates titration to effective dose due to the large inter-individual variability in opioid requirement. However nurse administered titration is difficult to provide in this setting due to high patient to nurse and physician ratios and multiple urgent competing patient demands. Patient controlled analgesia (PCA) lets ED patients actively participate in pain management by allowing self-titration to their desired level of pain relief. A tightly controlled randomized clinical trial (RCT) funded by the National Institute of Nursing Research (NINR) recently completed by the investigators group provides promising preliminary support for the efficacy and safety of PCA for patients with abdominal pain at a single ED with a dedicated research nurse and standard loading dose given to all patients. Objective: The overall objective is to provide optimal pain management in the ED. Specific aims: 1)To compare the effectiveness and safety of PCA and non-PCA opioid analgesia when nurses involved in clinical care deliver the intervention to a broad group of ED patients with acute pain at multiple clinical centers. The primary hypothesis is that there will be a greater decline in pain over time and similar safety in patients randomized to receive PCA compared to patients receiving standard opioid analgesia. 2) To describe the feasibility of PCA in terms of patient and provider acceptance, resource utilization and cost associated with PCA. Innovation: PCA represents a novel shift from the current provider-driven model of ED pain management to one in which the patient is an active participant. Few prior studies have evaluated ED PCA and no systematic evaluation of time and resources exists. Methodology: An RCT will be performed at 3 clinical centers. 750 patients with acute pain warranting IV opioid administration will be randomized to receive usual opioid analgesia determined by the provider or PCA (loading dose 0.1 mg/kg morphine and demand dose of 1 mg morphine available every 6 minutes). Pain intensity will be measured by a numerical rating scale (NRS) recorded every half hour up to 2 hours after initial opioid administration. Primary endpoints are rate of change in pain intensity from 30 minutes after initial administration of opioid to 2 hours as suggested by the results of the preliminary study and incidence of adverse events. PCA will also be compared to non-PCA opioid analgesia assessed at the end of the 2 hour study period by patient satisfaction with pain management; registered nurse (RN) assessment of time efficiency/ease of use and satisfaction with pain management; and physician satisfaction with pain management. Resource utilization and cost associated with implementation and use of PCA in the ED setting will be assessed by total Registered nurse (RN) time spent on pain management per patient; pharmacy preparation time per patient; material cost per patient and Registered Nurse and Physician training time necessary for PCA implementation. Significance: If PCA is demonstrated to be effective, safe, and associated with patient and provider acceptance and acceptable resource utilization, it has the potential to significantly improve ED pain management.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Pain

Keywords

Explore important study keywords that can help with search, categorization, and topic discovery.

Pain Emergency Analgesia ED patients acute pain IV opioid

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

NONE

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Patient Controlled Analgesia

PCA (loading dose 0.1 mg/kg morphine and demand dose of 1 mg morphine available every 6 minutes)

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Patient controlled analgesia (PCA)

Intervention Type DEVICE

Loading dose 0.1 mg/kg morphine and demand dose of 1 mg morphine available every 6 minutes

Usual Care

Usual opioid analgesia determined by the provider

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Usual Care

Intervention Type OTHER

Usual opioid analgesia determined by the provider

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Patient controlled analgesia (PCA)

Loading dose 0.1 mg/kg morphine and demand dose of 1 mg morphine available every 6 minutes

Intervention Type DEVICE

Usual Care

Usual opioid analgesia determined by the provider

Intervention Type OTHER

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

1. Age 18 to 65
2. Patient deemed by the ED attending physician to require IV opioid analgesia for pain and for whom the ED Attending Physician would consider using PCA

Exclusion Criteria

1. Patients requiring initial resuscitation that would preclude the use of PCA
2. Long-term use of prescription or non-prescription opioids now or within the past year
3. Recent opioid use within the past 24 hours
4. Chronic pain syndromes
5. Clinician suspicion of current or past opioid dependence/abuse
6. Altered mental status/Clinical suspicion of intoxication
7. Patients expected to require conscious sedation while in the ED
8. Pregnancy or breast-feeding
9. History of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, history of sleep apnea syndrome, baseline oxygen saturation (room air) \< 97%
10. Systolic blood pressure \< 100 mm Hg
11. Use of sedative medications e.g. benzodiazepines, monoamine oxidase inhibitors, phenothiazines, or tricyclic antidepressants.
12. History of renal insufficiency/renal failure
13. Prior allergic reaction to morphine
14. Inability to provide informed consent or inability to understand or operate PCA device
15. Previous entry of patient into study
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Maximum Eligible Age

65 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Jacobi Medical Center

OTHER

Sponsor Role collaborator

Montefiore Medical Center

OTHER

Sponsor Role collaborator

University of Pennsylvania

OTHER

Sponsor Role collaborator

National Institute of Nursing Research (NINR)

NIH

Sponsor Role collaborator

Albert Einstein College of Medicine

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Responsibility Role SPONSOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Polly Bijur, PhD

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Albert Einstein College of Medicine

Adrienne Birnbaum, MD

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Jacobi Medical Center

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

Jacobi Medical Center

The Bronx, New York, United States

Site Status

Montefiore Medical Center - Moses Division

The Bronx, New York, United States

Site Status

University of Pennsylvania

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

United States

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

R01NR013980

Identifier Type: NIH

Identifier Source: secondary_id

View Link

2012-485

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id