Comparison of the Accuracy of the Neurological Prognosis at 6 Months of Traumatic Brain Injury Between Junior and Senior Doctors
NCT ID: NCT04810039
Last Updated: 2021-07-13
Study Results
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.
COMPLETED
36 participants
OBSERVATIONAL
2021-03-01
2021-06-06
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.
Comparison of Two Initial Evaluation Scales of the Severity of Brain Injury Adults Patients on the Neurological Outcome at 6 Months
NCT03157453
Development and Validation of a Prognostic Score for Early Death in Head Injury Patients.
NCT02861547
Neurological Outcomes of Primary Intracerebral Haemorrhage
NCT03995940
Neurocognitive Impairment After Ischemic Stroke
NCT06262529
Multimodal Assessment of the Neurological Prognosis of Patients With Brain Lesions on ExtraCorporeal Life Support
NCT03633981
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Numerous studies have been carried out to study the prognosis of these patients, of which two are the most important: CRASH-study and IMPACT-study. However, of all these studies, none of them had the objective of comparing whether the experience of the clinician influenced the accuracy of his prognosis. Similarly, the PREDICT-TBI study conducted at our center, which aimed to compare the clinician's assessment with a prognostic score already in use (IMPACT score) for determining the prognosis of the brain injured person, did not study the influence of the clinician's experience on the accuracy of the prognosis.
Assessment of clinicians' judgment of neurological outcome in 20 patient charts.
20 records will be randomly selected from the N patients included in the PREDICT-TBI study.
These 20 pseudonymities records will be presented, including admission scans and pre-hospital clinical data.
For each clinician included, a questionnaire of the assumed neurological outcome of each patient will be completed and compared with the true neurological outcome, the main variable being the GOSE neurological outcome at 6 months (already collected in the PREDICT-TBI study).
Our hypothesis is that clinicians have a reliable judgment of the neurological outcome of the patient by estimating the probability of error of 30% in senior physicians and 40% in junior physicians. The reliability of this judgment will be measured by assessing the number of errors each clinician will make on the 20 medical records.
The main issue of the study is to better understand the prognosis at the initial phase in order to adapt the nature of the information given to the families in terms of prognosis.
The number of subjects needed is calculated by simulating two-sided tests of a generalized binomial model that compares the "senior" group to the "junior" group on 10,000 samples made up of n \* 2 binomial variables (n = 20, probability of error in seniors p1 = 0.3 (PREDCIT-TBI) and p2 = 0.4 for juniors). With an alpha risk of 5%, a power of 80%, we calculate the n = 18 physicians per group.
Inclusion and consent: After obtaining their consent we will include 18 doctors per group spread over several establishments.
Methodology: We will randomly select 20 files of moderate or severe traumatic brain injury patients treated in the neuro-ICU department of the Pitié-Salpêtrière hospital between March 2019 and December 2020 and included in the PREDICT-TBI study (CPP no. 19.01.21.68040) after having obtained their non-opposition from themselves or from their trusted person and not having been the subject of a limitation of active therapies during the first 24 hours. The patient was also not the victim of a lack of care during the first 24 hours. The prognostic data recognized in the literature for the first 24 hours of treatment are found in the computerized medical records of METAVISION and Carestream. This data, after being anonymized, will be submitted to the clinician for evaluation during an interview of a predefined duration. The prognosis will be assessed by means of a questionnaire submitted to all physicians detailed in the appendix. Then, it will be compared to the effective neurological status 6 months after the trauma assessed by a phone interview with the patient himself or his relatives.
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.
OTHER
PROSPECTIVE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
doctor working in neuro-intensive unite care
doctor predicting the outcome of the Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) score at 6 months compared to the actual outcome, in 20 anonymized records.
Predict the outcome of the Glasgow Outcome Scale
Predict the outcome of the Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) score at 6 months compared to the actual outcome, in 20 anonymized records.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Predict the outcome of the Glasgow Outcome Scale
Predict the outcome of the Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) score at 6 months compared to the actual outcome, in 20 anonymized records.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Junior group : advanced semester intensive care anaesthesists interns at the end of an internship composed of 5 months specialized in neuro-ICU
18 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Réanimation neurochirurgicale, Hôpital Pitié-Salpêtrière
Paris, , France
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
APHP210394
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.