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
24010 participants
OBSERVATIONAL
2022-06-01
2022-07-31
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
However, deintensification of medical and nursing care requires that previously monitored and partially supported bodily functions are restored to the point where further monitoring is no longer necessary. For this reason, transfer from an intensive care unit to the normal inpatient area is only possible if the patient in question has neither an increased need for monitoring nor an increased need for therapy. If this is not the case, then there is a risk of life-threatening conditions in the normal ward, which can sometimes occur very quickly. However, the need for further monitoring, or for continued intensive medical therapy, cannot be easily assessed. There is no laboratory value or clinical examination method that can be used to estimate beyond doubt whether a patient's condition could worsen if he or she is transferred to the normal ward. For this reason, the decision to transfer is made on the basis of the individual assessment by the attending physician. Although this is based on the synopsis of a wide variety of examinations and laboratory findings, it is therefore subject to large interindividual variations. Thus, the personal experience of the evaluating physician has a considerable influence on the decision for or against a transfer to the normal inpatient area.
In this respect, the decision to deintensify therapy, i.e. to transfer patients from intensive care units to the normal care area, is challenging:
The assessing physician has to make a prediction from the combination of the available findings under time pressure whether a transfer to the normal inpatient area is possible without endangering the patient. In this situation, it would be desirable to have an automated warning system that could describe the success of the transfer with sufficient accuracy in the presence of specific laboratory constellations. In the best case, such an approach would prevent dangerous transfers, but at the same time reduce unnecessary lengths of stay in the ICU. Machine learning methods seem particularly suited to support such a decision.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Machine Learning Prediction of Parameters of Early Warning Scores in Intensive Care Units
NCT06259812
To Survive After ICU Discharge
NCT02599636
Outcomes and Prognostic Factors in COVID-19
NCT04321265
Simple Observational Critical Care Studies
NCT03553069
International Multicenter Study of In-hospital Outcome of Patients After ICU Discharge
NCT02347150
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.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
COHORT
RETROSPECTIVE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Safe Discharge Positive
Safe Discharge Positive
Safe Discharge Classification
Safe Discharge Classification
Safe Discharge Negative
Safe Discharge Negative
Safe Discharge Classification
Safe Discharge Classification
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Safe Discharge Classification
Safe Discharge Classification
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
Exclusion Criteria
18 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Kepler University Hospital
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.
Thomas Tschoellitsch, MD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Kepler University Hospital and Johannes Kepler University, Linz, Austria
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Kepler University Hospital
Linz, Upper Austria, Austria
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.
SAFEDI
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.