Effectiveness of the NoseFrida Compared With Bulb Suction at Relieving Objective Signs of Nasal Obstruction and Reducing Return Visits in Pediatric Patients Presenting to the Emergency Department

NCT ID: NCT03666429

Last Updated: 2020-12-03

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

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

Recruitment Status

WITHDRAWN

Clinical Phase

NA

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2020-01-01

Study Completion Date

2020-11-30

Brief Summary

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

The mainstay of treatment in viral upper and lower respiratory tract disease is airway clearance. Viral respiratory tract infections account for a substantial amount of emergency department (ED) visits, financial and stress burden on caregivers. In addition, they also account for a large number of ED return visits. While airway clearance is considered a mainstay of treatment the pragmatic effectiveness of various devices remain unstudied in patients who are discharged from the ED.

The objectives of this study are to compare the pragmatic effectiveness of two commonly used suction devices the NoseFrida and bulb suction and to provide a descriptive analysis on 72 hour return to ED rates and readmission rates. Patients will be enrolled October 15, 2018 to October 15, 2019 or until NoseFrida supplies are depleted. Fridababy will supply 500 NoseFrida devices and replacement filters. Patients aged 1 day to 24 months presenting Vanderbilt Childrens ED with symptoms of nasal congestion or bronchiolitis who require suctioning and will be discharged from the ED will be approached for enrollment. Exclusion criteria include no upper airway abnormalities or previously enrolled in study. The study design is a prospective and retrospective observational study. We anticipate about 500 patients to be enrolled in this study. Families will then be approached for consent to participate. Caregiver will fill out a data collection form then be instructed on how to use the NoseFrida. Next, family with trial it on their child while in the ED. Caregivers will then fill out a 7 point Likert survey on both the bulb suction and NoseFrida device. The family will go home with this device and a set of replacement filters and instructed to suction their child as needed. The primary investigator (PI) will then complete a 72 hour chart review to determine the number of return to ED visits and readmission rates. To compare ED returns with retrospective data, KSP will conduct a review of the business objects database using ICD9 codes specific for viral respiratory tract infections over the past 3 years to determine a control return ED visit rate. Data will be compared using a paired T-test. If data is not normally distributed we will use a Wilcoxon signed-rank test. We will also use a multivariable logistic model to examine associations adjusted for age and illness severity.

Detailed Description

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

Background The mainstay of treatment in viral upper and lower respiratory tract disease is airway clearance. Viral respiratory tract infections account for a substantial amount of emergency department (ED) visits, financial and stress burden on caregivers. In addition, they also account for a large number of ED return visits. While airway clearance is considered a mainstay of treatment the pragmatic effectiveness of various devices remain unstudied in patients who are discharged from the ED.

Hypothesis:

There is no difference between the NoseFrida and the bulb suction at relieving objective signs of nasal obstruction or return ED visits.

Study Objective:

1. To compare the use of the NoseFrida device with a retrospective control (bulb suction) to determine if there is a decrease in the number of ED return visits.
2. To provide evidence based recommendations on the pragmatic effectiveness of two commonly used suction devices.
3. To provide a descriptive analysis on 72 hour return to ED rates and readmission rates.

Methods:

The study design is a prospective and retrospective observational study. We anticipate about 500 patients to be enrolled in this study. Patients who present to Vanderbilt Childrens Emergency Department will be identified by key study personnel (KSP) based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. Families will then be approached for consent to participate. Caregiver will fill out a data collection form then be instructed on how to use the NoseFrida. Next, family with trial it on their child while in the ED. Caregivers will then fill out a 7 point Likert survey on both the bulb suction and NoseFrida device. The family will go home with this device and a set of replacement filters and instructed to suction their child as needed. The primary investigator (PI) will then complete a 72 hour chart review to determine the number of return to ED visits and readmission rates. The family will keep the suction device at the completion of the study. To compare ED returns with retrospective data, KSP will conduct a review of the business objects database using ICD9 codes specific for viral respiratory tract infections over the past 3 years to determine a control return ED visit rate. Data will be compared using a paired T-test. If data is not normally distributed we will use a Wilcoxon signed-rank test. We will also use a multivariable logistic model to examine associations adjusted for age and illness severity. Fridababy will provide supplies needed for the study, however the company will not have access to the raw data or PHI. Once the results are published in a scientific journal, then Fridababy will have access to the results.

Conditions

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

Upper Respiratory Tract Infections Nasal Suction Return Emergency Department Visits

Study Design

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

Allocation Method

NON_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.

Bulb suction

Patients in this arm will be given bulb suction to treat nasal congestion. This group will contain participants who have used bulb suction in the past.

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Bulb suction

Intervention Type DEVICE

Parents will use the bulb suction on their child in the emergency room then complete a 7 point likert survey.

NoseFrida

Patients in this arm will be given the NoseFrida to treat nasal congestion. This group will contain participants who will trial the NoseFrida in the emergency department.

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

NoseFrida

Intervention Type DEVICE

Parents will use the NoseFrida in the emergency department and complete a 7 point likert survey.

Interventions

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

Bulb suction

Parents will use the bulb suction on their child in the emergency room then complete a 7 point likert survey.

Intervention Type DEVICE

NoseFrida

Parents will use the NoseFrida in the emergency department and complete a 7 point likert survey.

Intervention Type DEVICE

Eligibility Criteria

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

Inclusion Criteria

1. Age 1 day-24 months presenting to the ED with a complaint of nasal congestion or symptoms of bronchiolitis who require suctioning.
2. Parent/guardian has used a bulb suction device in the past.
3. This is the first presentation to Vanderbilt Childrens Emergency Department for current illness.
4. Patient will be discharged from the emergency room.
5. Parent/Guardian is able to read English.

Exclusion Criteria

1. No upper airway abnormalities, i.e. cleft palate or choanal atresia.
2. Previously enrolled in study.
Minimum Eligible Age

1 Day

Maximum Eligible Age

24 Months

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

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

Fridababy

INDUSTRY

Sponsor Role collaborator

Vanderbilt University Medical Center

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.

Donald Arnold, M.D.

Role: STUDY_CHAIR

Vanderbilt University Medical Center

Locations

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

Vanderbilt Childrens Emergency Department

Nashville, Tennessee, 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.

181365

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id